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

[oceanblueeyes]

Hi
Ok,Thankyou.

suzanne

You are more than welcome.

 

[Julessleuther]

:clap: I agree! Everyone here seems to have an answer for the reasons why the charges were dropped, without completely knowing all the facts... IMO. I am so frustrated that some people have taken such a stance without all the evidence. They have truly convicted him, and forgotten the whole process of our legal system. It is easy to go on a witchhunt from an armchair...

OBE, this "with prejudice" think has been explained in what feels like ad infinitum to me by I think several posters. Legalese aside, I agree with OL. Something just doesn't seem right in all of this, and I also await all the legal/psychological questions and their results.

Whether what he stated is a confession or not, his rights were grossly abused in the collection of that information and its release to the public.

As far as his mom saying "what happned to innocent until proven guilty" goes, what the he** else is she supposed to say? Most people have already tried and convicted this 8 YEAR OLD CHILD without knowing ALL the evidence -- which is still being collected and analyzed by professionals (and over analyzed by the rest of us).

Whether he is guilty because of thus far defending himself from undiscussed abuse, sociopathic & in need of therapy or totally innocent and set up by some other adult that we know nothing about....., there is no hope for this CHILD to be accepted back into society at much of any level from what I see. And, there is no way that I see that he can even get a fair trial now, given how it has been handled.

 

[Ms Suzanne]

Hi
I haven't convicted him.I want proof he did it.

suzanne

 

[Julessleuther]

She seems to indicate that he had a very happy and good life. And with him calling his step mom "mom" I think he loves his new mom too.

The Judge also put the stepmother's name on the list as one of the ones that can see him.

imoo

We have no evidence of his relationship with his stepmother based on this. His father may have requested or she may have requested that the boy call her mom, he may have had no choice. A name on a viewing list means nothing, it may be standard operating procedure.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

We have no evidence of his relationship with his stepmother based on this. His father may have requested or she may have requested that the boy call her mom, he may have had no choice. A name on a viewing list means nothing, it may be standard operating procedure.

Or just as likely it was up to him and he made the choice just like most little kids decide what they want to call their stepparents.

imoo

 

[Julessleuther]

Yes, how do we know that there wasn't someone else there and that is why he was calling the roommate?

quote=OrdinaryLife;2983761]We'll see if that's a fact and *if* it is, the reason why. There is more to this story.....[/quote]

 

[Julessleuther]

True, and why didn't the boy wait until the roommate came into the house, so noone else would hear the gun, why kill him outside? I think the roommate and the father came home from work together, and the father was in the house, and the roommate on the phone outside. Why didn't the roommate hear the father getting shot, yells, etc. I would love to see a whole time frame: when boy gets home, when father and roommate gets home, time roommate is on phone with wife, time of neighbors hearing the pops, time police are called....

That is one of the many things that bother me about this case.

What we know so far:
Child allegedly plans the murder of at least his father
Child allegedly shoots his father with the rifle.
Child allegedly waits for roomie to come home and according to the wife, he calls to the roomie that something is wrong with his father and he asks him to come inside.
Roomie allegedly hangs up the phone and starts inside.....

Yet the roomie is killed outside??? That doesn't make sense to me. If the roomie was headed in, the kid would be more likely to be in front of the door waiting for him. Even if he got anxious and couldn't wait, he would be more likely to step outside and shoot while the roomie was closer to the car, at least be aiming away from the house because he would be in the doorway or just outside the house. And remember, we are talking about a rifle here, not a handgun. So the length of the rifle has to be taken into account. (has LE verified the phone call between the wife and the roomie yet?)

A question was raised earlier why any hypothetical intruder would choose a youth rifle over any other weapons in the home. I can think of one explanation. It would depend on how the father handled his guns. If he kept his weapons locked up or even in his bedroom, any hypothetical intruder might not have had access to them. But this weapon was fairly recent in the home, it was the boys own weapon and he was allowed access to it. It may have even been kept downstairs. So the father may not have thought it needed to be kept locked or just may not have gotten a lock for it yet. So it may have been just what was handiest.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

:clap: I agree! Everyone here seems to have an answer for the reasons why the charges were dropped, without completely knowing all the facts... IMO. I am so frustrated that some people have taken such a stance without all the evidence. They have truly convicted him, and forgotten the whole process of our legal system. It is easy to go on a witchhunt from an armchair...

He will be tried by a Judge. Message boards don't have any ability to convict anyone. Opinion are encouraged and allowed.

Well we do know that the DA dropped this charge but stated it was "without prejudice." If he was going to dismiss it for good he would have filed a motion to dismiss count one "with prejudice" showing he never has intents to charge the boy.

How is that misconstruing anything? Or maybe you can explain why he didnt file the "with prejudice" motion if he has plans to drop the charges completely and forevermore on the murder charge concerning his father?

I really dont understand why that is so hard to understand.

1. "with"-----plans to not charge ever. Dropped totally.
2. "without"-----can refile charges at anytime chosen time.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Yes, how do we know that there wasn't someone else there and that is why he was calling the roommate?

quote=OrdinaryLife;2983761]We'll see if that's a fact and *if* it is, the reason why. There is more to this story.....

[/QUOTE]

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

 

[oceanblueeyes]

True, and why didn't the boy wait until the roommate came into the house, so noone else would hear the gun, why kill him outside? I think the roommate and the father came home from work together, and the father was in the house, and the roommate on the phone outside. Why didn't the roommate hear the father getting shot, yells, etc. I would love to see a whole time frame: when boy gets home, when father and roommate gets home, time roommate is on phone with wife, time of neighbors hearing the pops, time police are called....

Could have been he wanted him to come closer but not close enough to enter the house where Tim would see his friend laying there dead on the stairs.

 

[Julessleuther]

Good thought, but in AZ, you are allowed to carry a concealed weapon, so many people do. (Not me!)

Hi
Quote
But wasn't there a much large caliber handgun found on the truck seat outside?

Who's truck?Romans truck?Why would he just have a gun out on his truck seat?Is this normal up where they lived or was he afraid of someone?

suzanne

 

[Julessleuther]

I know hon! I hope for his sake that he is innocent, but if he is guilty, I will humbly eat my cowboy hat. :crazy:

Hi
I haven't convicted him.I want proof he did it.

suzanne

 

[Ms Suzanne]

Hi
I was born and raised in Florida.I just remember guns really not being allowed anywhere.

suzanne

 

[Julessleuther]

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.

He will be tried by a Judge. Message boards don't have any ability to convict anyone. Opinion are encouraged and allowed.

Well we do know that the DA dropped this charge but stated it was "without prejudice." If he was going to dismiss it for good he would have filed a motion to dismiss count one "with prejudice" showing he never has intents to charge the boy.

How is that misconstruing anything? Or maybe you can explain why he didnt file the "with prejudice" motion if he has plans to drop the charges completely and forevermore on the murder charge concerning his father?

I really dont understand why that is so hard to understand.

1. "with"-----plans to not charge ever. Dropped totally.
2. "without"-----can refile charges at anytime chosen time.

 

[chiperoni]

"I think I shot him twice because he was suffering". What is up with that sentence? There is more to this. Much more to this story.

Charges against murdering his father dropped, though the other count still stands. I wonder if there is more of an interesting dynamic between the two men vs just this child? He should have had an advocate there for him. As soon as the discussion began to change with the questions asked, there should have been a legal counsel for this child. Sorry, but I still await the results of many legal/psychological questions and tests done.

This smells wrong...

Yes...There certainly seemed to be a rush to judgment by LE. I need the whole picture too. There are way too many unanswered questions.

 

[Gray]

Where was the stepmother in all of this?

 

[colette]

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.

 

[colette]

Where was the stepmother in all of this?

The stepmother was still at work.

 

[lae]

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?

 

[liljim]

chip - yeah that really threw me at first, the police were saying right away that they were going to recommend that he be tried as an adult, and that it would be a precedent setting case. imo its still too early NOW to say he should be tried as an adult, nevermind saying that over a week ago when many basic facts were still unknown.

regarding people that have "already convicted" the boy, they are just stating their opinions on the facts that we have so far, everyone seems to understand that there is a lot more to learn about this case.