AZ - Timothy Romans, 39, & Vincent Romero, 29, slain, St Johns, 5 Nov 2008 - #3

[MeoW333]

:yuck:
Where's the little throw up guy for his perspective of this.....???




Yeah, I think the police think their part is finished. It's that "successful" word they use that makes me want to find the little throw up guy.

:sick: I found the vomit smiley for you and me.

This case is far from what IMO, i would call successful. Interrogating an 8 year old boy against his family's wishes and not providing him counsel, under the guise of a "witness interview" when it was obviously clear they considered him a suspect. One of the officers was not even certified for interrogations, and the other was a friend of the family. Thank God they can't use that "confession".
At the start of the investigation focusing solely on the boy, all other possible leads were hastily checked in a manner that wouldn't be good in trying to obtain information; never following up on the possible lead of the white car they obtained from their "witness".. i could go on and on. The crime scene was released so quickly that Brewer couldn't even get a look at it.
All of this is evident in the pdf. files of the court questions with the officers at the scene. I sincerely hope the police there learn from their mistakes.

 

[Ms Suzanne]

:sick: I found the vomit smiley for you and me.

This case is far from what IMO, i would call successful. Interrogating an 8 year old boy against his family's wishes and not providing him counsel, under the guise of a "witness interview" when it was obviously clear they considered him a suspect. One of the officers was not even certified for interrogations, and the other was a friend of the family. Thank God they can't use that "confession".
At the start of the investigation focusing solely on the boy, all other possible leads were hastily checked in a manner that wouldn't be good in trying to obtain information; never following up on the possible lead of the white car they obtained from their "witness".. i could go on and on. The crime scene was released so quickly that Brewer couldn't even get a look at it.
All of this is evident in the pdf. files of the court questions with the officers at the scene. I sincerely hope the police there learn from their mistakes.

Very well said.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

:sick: I found the vomit smiley for you and me.

This case is far from what IMO, i would call successful. Interrogating an 8 year old boy against his family's wishes and not providing him counsel, under the guise of a "witness interview" when it was obviously clear they considered him a suspect. One of the officers was not even certified for interrogations, and the other was a friend of the family. Thank God they can't use that "confession".
At the start of the investigation focusing solely on the boy, all other possible leads were hastily checked in a manner that wouldn't be good in trying to obtain information; never following up on the possible lead of the white car they obtained from their "witness".. i could go on and on. The crime scene was released so quickly that Brewer couldn't even get a look at it.
All of this is evident in the pdf. files of the court questions with the officers at the scene. I sincerely hope the police there learn from their mistakes.

I don't believe that is true and as far as I know it wasn't Roca that threw the confession out but the Prosecutor stating he did not intend to use the confession unless the boy testifies and then he would use it to impeach him if need be.

Also like in any case there will be primary interviews but in the discovery supplementals given by the Prosecutor it includes more interviews and re-interviews. So saying that LE never followed up and continued the investigation is just erroneous, imo. Even Judge Roca knew they were continuing to investigate this case and gave the State and defense permission to proceed on, even though the case was at a standstill due to the competency issue.

The Casey Anthony defense team also weren't allowed into the crime scene until LE released it either and had completed their investigation and removed all found at the location where Caylee was found. They will however be given all of the reports, videos and photos just like this defense team will receive.

We have absolutely no idea if they didn't continued to search for the white car with no rims on the back. Supplemental discovery motions have been filed and given to the defense on updates by the police officers involved in the investigation. What was learned each time the supplemental was given to the defense, remains unknown to us but not to the defense.

I don't agree that they immediately thought he was a suspect. If they had they would have done GSR testing on his hands and wouldn't have waited until the following day to collect his clothes and shoes.

imoo

 

[Chargergal]

I think the chief may have gotten a little ahead of himself, there. Unless he believes that the "successful investigation" was concluded within two days of the murder, with the arrest of the child.



THIS is certainly interesting.

Anyone else notice now he indicated they have new state of the art recording devices to record their interviews. Interesting how not one other interview was recorded EXCEPT the boys.

Don't break that arm patting your department on the back just yet Chief.

 

[Chargergal]

Very well said.

Ditto!

I also believe that if they didn't feel he was a suspect the two police officiers would have inerviewed him in street clothes to be less "official". I also do not believe that at anytime during that interview the boy felt like he could leave...IMO that information was obtained voluntairly.

I am also disappointed that things are pushed back a week...it is just eight more days he has to sit in JD.

Also, the reference that the boy is just like Casey Anthony just makes me sick.

 

[MeoW333]

Ditto!

I also believe that if they didn't feel he was a suspect the two police officiers would have inerviewed him in street clothes to be less "official". I also do not believe that at anytime during that interview the boy felt like he could leave...IMO that information was obtained voluntairly.

I am also disappointed that things are pushed back a week...it is just eight more days he has to sit in JD.

Also, the reference that the boy is just like Casey Anthony just makes me sick.

Agreed, Chargergal; if they were going to do a witness interview, they could have done it in the comfort of the boy's grandparents' home (after all the officers knew the family) with adults present. We all know they interviewed the neighbors' at their own homes.

Was Tiffany interviewed? What about Tonya? We see no video or audio records of those. In the court transcripts, the officers had said they were still organizing their notes on those interviews, if they even took notes..:furious:

 

[MeoW333]

I don't believe that is true and as far as I know it wasn't Roca that threw the confession out but the Prosecutor stating he did not intend to use the confession unless the boy testifies and then he would use it to impeach him if need be.

Also like in any case there will be primary interviews but in the discovery supplementals given by the Prosecutor it includes more interviews and re-interviews. So saying that LE never followed up and continued the investigation is just erroneous, imo. Even Judge Roca knew they were continuing to investigate this case and gave the State and defense permission to proceed on, even though the case was at a standstill due to the competency issue.

The Casey Anthony defense team also weren't allowed into the crime scene until LE released it either and had completed their investigation and removed all found at the location where Caylee was found. They will however be given all of the reports, videos and photos just like this defense team will receive.

We have absolutely no idea if they didn't continued to search for the white car with no rims on the back. Supplemental discovery motions have been filed and given to the defense on updates by the police officers involved in the investigation. What was learned each time the supplemental was given to the defense, remains unknown to us but not to the defense.

I don't agree that they immediately thought he was a suspect. If they had they would have done GSR testing on his hands and wouldn't have waited until the following day to collect his clothes and shoes.

imoo

Smart move by the prosecutor to throw that interview out, it would just get thrown out in court anyway. It's already made St John's PD the laughing stock of how not to interview a child.

 

[Fairy1]

Smart move by the prosecutor to throw that interview out, it would just get thrown out in court anyway. It's already made St John's PD the laughing stock of how not to interview a child.

I believe they will throw out the "confession" no matter what happens. I do not believe there will be a plea bargain at all. If his attorneys have any brains at all, they willl let this go to trial. IMO, this child is covering for someone.

 

[Bobbisangel]

I know the boy has been evaluated for competency and has requested therapy. When has he had his mental evaluation and when has his therapy with confidentiality begun. They haven't spent money yet on therapy. His competency to stand trial on the defense side showed he was incompetent to stand trial. We don't know the pros side yet. And from my class on psychology and law we learned you have to pretty much have the brain of a grapefruit to be found incompetent. Many, many are evaluated for competency, but very few are found to be incompetent.

I'm sorry, but I don't have as much faith in the courts or the attorneys in this case. The defense has made motions to get a therapist for the boy an to allow for therapy with confidentiality but the court is dragging their feet in allowing it. Sure, he can talk to one without confidentiality, but that involves the boy being afraid of whatever he says being used to hurt him and misconstrued. The court also would not allow the boy to have a photo of his mother with him. So yes, I can believe they would hold the boy for no reason.

I respect your opinion, but all the facts aren't in yet.

If this boy did not murder his father and Tim then why not get a therapist in to talk to him even if what the boy says is repeated? If he is 100% innocent then why does he even need restrictions on what the therapist tells who? The therapist is supposed to be someone that this boy can talk to about his feelings what ever they may be or just someone to talk to about anything he wants to talk about. If most people think this little boy is innocent then what is wrong with just getting a therapist in to talk to him without any restrictions? So what if some of what he says is talked about in court later? If he really didn't do the shootings then there is nothing to worry about is there? The therapist won't be questioning the boy about what happened or how it happened or anything about the case. If the boy choses to talk about the murders then whatever is said will come straight from the boy without any coaching or questions. I just don't see the problem.

 

[Fairy1]

If this boy did not murder his father and Tim then why not get a therapist in to talk to him even if what the boy says is repeated? If he is 100% innocent then why does he even need restrictions on what the therapist tells who? The therapist is supposed to be someone that this boy can talk to about his feelings what ever they may be or just someone to talk to about anything he wants to talk about. If most people think this little boy is innocent then what is wrong with just getting a therapist in to talk to him without any restrictions? So what if some of what he says is talked about in court later? If he really didn't do the shootings then there is nothing to worry about is there? The therapist won't be questioning the boy about what happened or how it happened or anything about the case. If the boy choses to talk about the murders then whatever is said will come straight from the boy without any coaching or questions. I just don't see the problem.

I agree BA. I would much rather have his account of what occurred that day as told to a therapist than to cops. But mostly, I would like to have on record this child's state of mind, before, during and after the murders.

 

[Fairy1]

If this boy did not murder his father and Tim then why not get a therapist in to talk to him even if what the boy says is repeated? If he is 100% innocent then why does he even need restrictions on what the therapist tells who? The therapist is supposed to be someone that this boy can talk to about his feelings what ever they may be or just someone to talk to about anything he wants to talk about. If most people think this little boy is innocent then what is wrong with just getting a therapist in to talk to him without any restrictions? So what if some of what he says is talked about in court later? If he really didn't do the shootings then there is nothing to worry about is there? The therapist won't be questioning the boy about what happened or how it happened or anything about the case. If the boy choses to talk about the murders then whatever is said will come straight from the boy without any coaching or questions. I just don't see the problem.

I agree BA. I would much rather have his account of what occurred that day as told to a therapist than to cops. But mostly, I would like to have on record this child's state of mind, before, during and after the murders.

 

[Fairy1]

If this boy did not murder his father and Tim then why not get a therapist in to talk to him even if what the boy says is repeated? If he is 100% innocent then why does he even need restrictions on what the therapist tells who? The therapist is supposed to be someone that this boy can talk to about his feelings what ever they may be or just someone to talk to about anything he wants to talk about. If most people think this little boy is innocent then what is wrong with just getting a therapist in to talk to him without any restrictions? So what if some of what he says is talked about in court later? If he really didn't do the shootings then there is nothing to worry about is there? The therapist won't be questioning the boy about what happened or how it happened or anything about the case. If the boy choses to talk about the murders then whatever is said will come straight from the boy without any coaching or questions. I just don't see the problem.

I agree BA. I would much rather have his account of what occurred that day as told to a therapist than to cops. But mostly, I would like to have on record this child's state of mind, before, during and after the murders.

 

[Fairy1]

Wow - what is up with the server? My post recorded 3 times and it won't let me delete!!!!

 

[MeoW333]

Fairy1, that happened to me on the Jett thread, JBean said to go to edit post then advanced then delete. It happens sometimes..

 

[seashore]

If this boy did not murder his father and Tim then why not get a therapist in to talk to him even if what the boy says is repeated? If he is 100% innocent then why does he even need restrictions on what the therapist tells who? The therapist is supposed to be someone that this boy can talk to about his feelings what ever they may be or just someone to talk to about anything he wants to talk about. If most people think this little boy is innocent then what is wrong with just getting a therapist in to talk to him without any restrictions? So what if some of what he says is talked about in court later? If he really didn't do the shootings then there is nothing to worry about is there? The therapist won't be questioning the boy about what happened or how it happened or anything about the case. If the boy choses to talk about the murders then whatever is said will come straight from the boy without any coaching or questions. I just don't see the problem.

Confidentiality in therapy is a huge important part of therapy. Trust is built by knowing that what you say is not told to anyone. The confidentiality is part of feeling safe. If a person does not know that what feelings they have is not going to be told to others (in this case, perhaps parents, teachers, neighbors, possible accompliss) then feelings and thoughts are kept inside to fester until more harm than good is done. This child is afraid and needs confidentiality if he is to be helped fully; he was in a truama situation the day of the murders wheather or not he committed them. Feeling safe and secure in a relationship (which here is the client/patient therapist alliance/relationship) is crucial to trust and healing. The therapist has also ethics principles to abide by. That is why there is a problem with not having confidentiality.

 

[seashore]

I agree BA. I would much rather have his account of what occurred that day as told to a therapist than to cops. But mostly, I would like to have on record this child's state of mind, before, during and after the murders.

Therapy is not about his guilt or innocence. Therapy is not about getting information out of him to broadcast all over the world. Therapy is about helping him cope. Therapy is different from mental evaluations. Therapy is to benefit his mental well being, not for a circus.

I cannot believe folks cannot see past the tragedy to allow this CHILD to start the process of healing. What will happen to this CHILD if he doesn't get the help he so vitally needs and he is found not guilty? If he is trying to protect someone for this crime then denying him the compassion and humanity he deserves now will be worse for all concerned. Then I would certainly hope folks who are behaving as roman spectators of christians being thrown to the lions will beg mercy and forgiveness from this boy and his family. This really makes me very very angry.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Agreed, Chargergal; if they were going to do a witness interview, they could have done it in the comfort of the boy's grandparents' home (after all the officers knew the family) with adults present. We all know they interviewed the neighbors' at their own homes.

Was Tiffany interviewed? What about Tonya? We see no video or audio records of those. In the court transcripts, the officers had said they were still organizing their notes on those interviews, if they even took notes..:furious:

I don't think so. They said that they first thought he was covering for someone, like a family member. That was the reason at first that they did not want any family members in there, hoping he would tell them who did these crimes.

If that had been the case, children are often afraid to open up when an adult is present, especially a family member.

imoo

 

[MeoW333]

I don't think so. They said that they first thought he was covering for someone, like a family member. That was the reason at first that they did not want any family members in there, hoping he would tell them who did these crimes.

If that had been the case, children are often afraid to open up when an adult is present, especially a family member.

imoo

I think so. If it were the case he was covering for a family member, he should have been appointed an attorney present at first or as soon as he started "confessing".
It's obvious you want to see the boy guilty, OBE, and have no empathy for him.

 

[Trino]

It's obvious you want to see the boy guilty, OBE, and have no empathy for him.

While this comment was not directed at me, I feel I should respond because, I, too, feel the boy is guilty. OBE, like me, has only stated opinions, based on what is known. This does not mean we have no empathy for the boy. Guilt and empathy are separate items.

IMO the boy needs both punishment and help without forgetting the Roman and Romero families. They, too, deserve justice.

 

[seashore]

While this comment was not directed at me, I feel I should respond because, I, too, feel the boy is guilty. OBE, like me, has only stated opinions, based on what is known. This does not mean we have no empathy for the boy. Guilt and empathy are separate items.

IMO the boy needs both punishment and help without forgetting the Roman and Romero families. They, too, deserve justice.

What is also known is that the Roman family now doubt the boys guilt. The Romero family have members who have also come from out of town to support the boy.

IF the boy is in fact guilty, then he should be punished APPROPRIATLY as an 8/9 YEAR OLD CHILD, NOT AS AN ADULT AND NOT to have REVENGE inflicted upon him so that bloodsuckers can be entertained.