AZ - Timothy Romans, 39, & Vincent Romero, 29, slain, St Johns, 5 Nov 2008 - #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree with you that he was left out, in more ways then one. I believe the biomom about how and what Tiffany said and acted towards the boy when she called.

I do too.Didn't the Bio mom Eryn Thomas Bloomfield say she thought there was some abuse to her son from the step mom.
 
Why, as to her whereabouts, of course :crazy:

LOL who knows. Maybe it was frowned upon if employees called each other on the phones so they fax back and forth instead. Hmm sounds pretty good thing to do especially if it goes right into a particular office. Wish I had thought of that before I retired.

imoo
 
How is the boy left out of the wedding?? He was THE RING BEARER!
 
We can not take what other people say in their blogs as truth or fact.
 
The difference IS, Vincent and Tiffany were 'newlyweds,'....... while Cindy Sommers and her husband had been married for a few years, she had 4 children AND she was older than him, IIRC. I believe she was about 29 while he was just 23.

JMHO
fran

PS...she definitely was a wild one. Innocent too. Wonder if Tiffany is? innocent that is. ;) fran

I looked her up. Wasn't to smart in her choices after her husband died...
 
LOL who knows. Maybe it was frowned upon if employees called each other on the phones so they fax back and forth instead. Hmm sounds pretty good thing to do especially if it goes right into a particular office. Wish I had thought of that before I retired.

imoo

She could have sent a text anyway. Her friend would have left her phone on vibrate if that were the case.
 
Wow, minachica, you're are finding some incredibly good things :) I've found nothing like this stuff in all my research so I am much impressed and grateful :)

On a sidenote, how sad it was to read how much she adored her husband only to know the rumor of him proposing to another woman in St Johns the very night before...WOW..that is tragically sad for her to have to deal with all of that added heartbreak in the aftermath. Assuming there is ANY shred of truth to that rumor, of course, it could always be just that, a poisonous rumor...I am absolutely NOT stating that as fact...
 
Wow, minachica, you're are finding some incredibly good things :) I've found nothing like this stuff in all my research so I am much impressed and grateful :)

On a sidenote, how sad it was to read how much she adored her husband only to know the rumor of him proposing to another woman in St Johns the very night before...WOW..that is tragically sad for her to have to deal with all of that added heartbreak in the aftermath. Assuming there is ANY shred of truth to that rumor, of course, it could always be just that, a poisonous rumor...I am absolutely NOT stating that as fact...

For them to even be fighting over that rumor is questionable as to their amount of love for eachother; otherwise they would be able to laugh it off.
 
oh MeoW333, I don't know that the couple was fighting over it, or that Mrs. Romans was (or is) even aware of the rumor...

And colette, yes it does appear that he was the ringbearer, which just strikes me as even MORE odd that he doesn't appear in the pics, as he was actually part of the wedding party...heh, that certainly doesn't make it look any better in my opinion..
 
Thank you. They are beautiful photos.

I think the one set that has the two shots side by side, the one on the right, in black and white, where an older man is kissing Tiffany and I think that the boy is the one on the right, looking up at someone.

imoo

They ARE beautiful photos. It's a very sad situation, that they won't have a life together.
 
I was thinking about stepmom going to parties after the murders, not so much about how much Mrs Roman loved her husband. I'm just saying you never know what is online, including fake myspaces and blogs of the supposed victim or perp I have seen in other cases.
 
Maybe he tried to be with and reached out to his grandmother.
 
How can you say the boy was excluded from the wedding when he was the ring bearer? Just because the photographer didn't put pictures of him on his web site??? Remember this is the photographer's site, a comercial web site... not the family site.
 
How can you say the boy was excluded from the wedding when he was the ring bearer? Just because the photographer didn't put pictures of him on his web site??? Remember this is the photographer's site, a comercial web site... not the family site.

Maybe the photographer stunk.
 
Agreed that it was the photographers site, I never once disputed or alluded to the fact that it might not be in any of my posts...at the risk of repeating myself, In my experience it is customary to take many photos of the "new family" not just the new bride and groom when it is a wedding where one of them (or both) have a child(ren) from a previous relationship. It is a celebration of new family, not just 2 people, and is customary to have numerous photos of such. I find it harder to believe there were slews of family photos that were simply omitted when there are random shots of people in casual wear included. Seems to me there simply were no photos of the boy to include on the site, not that they were omitted. Which I find odd, I know I would be seeking the boy out to be included in photos, I'd expect to see many of father and son, and of the 3. I didn't see ONE photo of that....odd IMO, no matter whose site it is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
162
Guests online
292
Total visitors
454

Forum statistics

Threads
608,873
Messages
18,246,922
Members
234,478
Latest member
moonfoundation
Back
Top