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

[oceanblueeyes]

Quote from newspaper article?


Prosecutors are asking Roca to dismiss the murder charge stemming from Romero's death. When they brought up the possibility of Roca dismissing both charges, the judge declined to address that as well. If the judge were to grant the prosecutors' motion, it would allow them to refile.


They offered to dismiss both charges?I wonder why?

The DA must want both charges to be filed later, like when he becomes 15, when he can be tried as an adult for both murders.

imoo

 

[fran]

I think this case was way above the Apache LE. That is not to say they are inept, but this case was above the experience that is needed. I believe they messed up the interview with this child. You have an LE official who is a neighbor (absolutely a bias that never should have happened). I think the DA knows how much could very possibly be tossed out in this case and will not risk a trial. We shall see. All we have been able to do is speculate with what has been made available in the media.

IMHO, these officers used several 'interrogation tactics' that ultimately coerced this child to confess. Whether it's a bogus confession remains to be seen.

FWIW, the below link involves discussion of the youths, between the ages of 14 to 16 who confessed to the "Central Park Jogger" rape and beating. After being tried and convicted and recanting their 'confessions,' they each served several years in prison. That is until they were found to be innocent when another guy was linked through DNA. Classic example, just like this little boy's interrogation (IMO), of a confession that is forced upon the alleged perp.

I believe we're going to be hearing about the comparison of these two cases again. As a matter of fact, I'm almost certain of it.

JMHO
fran


http://writ.news.findlaw.com/cassel/20021217.html

THE FALSE CONFESSIONS IN THE CENTRAL PARK JOGGER CASE:
How They Happened, and How To Stop Similar Injustices from Happening Again


officers are indoctrinated into the psychological methods of interrogation designed to get a suspect to confess. Manuals tell investigators, for instance, to use the physical environment to law enforcement advantage, by creating small, starkly furnished, and brightly lit interrogation rooms; they instruct in how to get in a defendant's face and invade his personal space. Officers learn how to conduct long interviews that may span three or four days, with little respect for a suspect's need for sleep, food, or bathroom breaks.

The purpose of all these tactics, of course, to break down recalcitrant suspects. The problem is that they tend to break down vulnerable and innocent people as well as - or perhaps even better than - the hardened and guilty recidivist.

Deceptive tactics are also encouraged. Investigators are taught to minimize the likely results of suspects' confessions, and to suggest to suspects that they will get a better "deal" if they talk than if they remain silent. They pretend to identify with the suspects and to offer "rationalizations" for suspects' alleged crimes, suggesting the crimes were not so bad, and thus confessing them wouldn't be so bad, either.

............snip................

These lies can be very harmful, since the suspect can, through repetition, be induced by the investigator to believe them. Studies show that some people who falsely confess do so because they internalize the repeated suggestions and scenarios of questioners. Nevertheless, offering scenarios for the suspect to buy into, is still a common tactic of investigators.

Indeed, a popular text of investigative techniques explains how to offer alternative explanations for how and why a crime occurred, and encourage the subject to pick "a," "b," or "c." Once the subject makes his choice, the questioner is told to help the subject "fill in the blanks," often falsely.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I thought in juvie cases the judge hears the evidence only, not a jury?

You are right, they do, but I did read somewhere last night that some juvenile cases can have a jury trial but I have no idea where I read that now or which type of case. There must be an exception since Brewer asked for one but was denied.

Well that makes it even tougher. Judges are much more hard nosed and matter of fact. They don't look at a case with emotion but the evidence presented. And they sure DON'T buy into coincidences. lol

imo

 

[Ms Suzanne]

They will use the same evidence and how it was collected when he is 15 and an adult?Most of it probably thrown out of court then too?They need to make sure they do not lose all this evidence.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I thought the officers only told him one lie and that is when one of them said that someone had seen him?

Out of an hour long interview that is not lying continuously imo. Not at all.

They sure wouldn't have lead him into telling the story that he did.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

They will use the same evidence and how it was collected when he is 15 and an adult?Most of it probably thrown out of court then too?They need to make sure they do not lose all this evidence.

LE have evidence for cases over 30 years or more and solve old unsolved crimes all the time using the stored evidence from long ago.

They will still have the evidence secured.

imoo

 

[fran]

http://www.abc15.com/mediacenter/[email protected]&navCatId=3

Thanks for the link suzannec

Interesting,...........just like with everything else in this case, because the child is so young, they are NOT following 'normal rules' and have NOT given the defense the lab results and anything they have against him. They keep getting continuances...........

NORMALLY, a defense attorney is given anything the pros has 10 days after charges have been filed. YET,............NOT in this case.

Curious, IMHO. IF they have 'incriminating evidence,' they WOULD have turned it over. OR? does the alleged incriminating evidence also include 'exculpitory evidence?' Is there something LE doesn't want the defense attorney to see?

JMHO
fran

PS.........FWIW, the 'defense attorney' is NOT saying his client is guilty. He said, "I don't know what happened."..........fran

 

[Salem]

Quote: The left elbow shot is really throwing me off here.

Salem

I meant to ask you this Salem and forgot. Why is the elbow shot throwing you off?

Vincent Romero was shot in the left elbow, back and head and found laying face down on the stairs. The elbow and back shots were done with the shooter behind him. The head shots most likely done when he was already down and incapacitated.

imoo[/quote]

Because - IF the kid was hiding in the bushes as VR walked toward the house, VR's left arm would have been somewhat protected. The right arm would have been the arm most likely to be hit. IF VR was left-handed and reached for the screen with this left hand, then I can see how the shot might have landed there. Otherwise - not.

Also - this kid had 8 minutes maximum. His dad was shot in the house, correct? That means the kid had to come back outside. Doesn't ring true at this point in time, I really want to see the forensics on the guns and shooting pattern. Did the kid wound his dad, go shoot TR, go back in the house and shoot his dad again, come back outside and shoot TR again? How could TR have not heard the shots if the kid was hiding in the bushes shooting towards the house? Not possible. The kid had to be inside. That means he then had to come OUT side to get to TR. TR had to see him and know what was happening.

Logistically - this just does not work out. I have drawn myself a picture and what we know so far does not fit. Maybe there are some typos in what we know? Maybe not, I'm waiting to see.

Also I would like to point out on the confession - what the kid confessed to, does not match the murder scene. This is an important clue when obtaining confessions and analyzing them for truth. It is my opinion that the kid was afraid his mother would yell at him, so he told the cops what they wanted to hear. He gave details that did not match up, but was doing his best to get it right so he wouldn't get in trouble.

Salem

 

[Ms Suzanne]

I meant to ask you this Salem and forgot. Why is the elbow shot throwing you off?

Vincent Romero was shot in the left elbow, back and head and found laying face down on the stairs. The elbow and back shots were done with the shooter behind him. The head shots most likely done when he was already down and incapacitated.

imoo

Because - IF the kid was hiding in the bushes as VR walked toward the house, VR's left arm would have been somewhat protected. The right arm would have been the arm most likely to be hit. IF VR was left-handed and reached for the screen with this left hand, then I can see how the shot might have landed there. Otherwise - not.

Also - this kid had 8 minutes maximum. His dad was shot in the house, correct? That means the kid had to come back outside. Doesn't ring true at this point in time, I really want to see the forensics on the guns and shooting pattern. Did the kid wound his dad, go shoot TR, go back in the house and shoot his dad again, come back outside and shoot TR again? How could TR have not heard the shots if the kid was hiding in the bushes shooting towards the house? Not possible. The kid had to be inside. That means he then had to come OUT side to get to TR. TR had to see him and know what was happening.

Logistically - this just does not work out. I have drawn myself a picture and what we know so far does not fit. Maybe there are some typos in what we know? Maybe not, I'm waiting to see.

Also I would like to point out on the confession - what the kid confessed to, does not match the murder scene. This is an important clue when obtaining confessions and analyzing them for truth. It is my opinion that the kid was afraid his mother would yell at him, so he told the cops what they wanted to hear. He gave details that did not match up, but was doing his best to get it right so he wouldn't get in trouble.

Salem[/quote]


Quote
Also I would like to point out on the confession - what the kid confessed to, does not match the murder scene.

I noticed this too.Just curious what did you hear him confess too?Why use two guns on Mr Romans?

 

[Ms Suzanne]

I am going to watch the confession again.I will pick it apart.I think it was shock that asked if there were transcripts or links to it.Does any one know if there are any transcripts to that?we need a forum to put all this information.

Link to whole confession too?

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Thanks for the link suzannec

Interesting,...........just like with everything else in this case, because the child is so young, they are NOT following 'normal rules' and have NOT given the defense the lab results and anything they have against him. They keep getting continuances...........

NORMALLY, a defense attorney is given anything the pros has 10 days after charges have been filed. YET,............NOT in this case.

Curious, IMHO. IF they have 'incriminating evidence,' they WOULD have turned it over. OR? does the alleged incriminating evidence also include 'exculpatory evidence?' Is there something LE doesn't want the defense attorney to see?

JMHO
fran

PS.........FWIW, the 'defense attorney' is NOT saying his client is guilty. He said, "I don't know what happened."..........fran

They have given the defense evidence since the very beginning. They list them on the Apache website when things are turned over but the forensics and ballistics will not be back until the end of January 08. The Judge recognized that and set that date for it to be done.

The DA is not the one wanting this case delayed. They want it to go forward and even question the Judge for staying the case.


imo

 

[Ms Suzanne]

Thanks for the link suzannec

Interesting,...........just like with everything else in this case, because the child is so young, they are NOT following 'normal rules' and have NOT given the defense the lab results and anything they have against him. They keep getting continuances...........

NORMALLY, a defense attorney is given anything the pros has 10 days after charges have been filed. YET,............NOT in this case.

Curious, IMHO. IF they have 'incriminating evidence,' they WOULD have turned it over. OR? does the alleged incriminating evidence also include 'exculpitory evidence?' Is there something LE doesn't want the defense attorney to see?

JMHO
fran

PS.........FWIW, the 'defense attorney' is NOT saying his client is guilty. He said, "I don't know what happened."..........fran

Your welcome.I have never went by the screen name suzannec before.There are always 4 4's after it.LOL.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I meant to ask you this Salem and forgot. Why is the elbow shot throwing you off?

Vincent Romero was shot in the left elbow, back and head and found laying face down on the stairs. The elbow and back shots were done with the shooter behind him. The head shots most likely done when he was already down and incapacitated.

imoo

Because - IF the kid was hiding in the bushes as VR walked toward the house, VR's left arm would have been somewhat protected. The right arm would have been the arm most likely to be hit. IF VR was left-handed and reached for the screen with this left hand, then I can see how the shot might have landed there. Otherwise - not.

Also - this kid had 8 minutes maximum. His dad was shot in the house, correct? That means the kid had to come back outside. Doesn't ring true at this point in time, I really want to see the forensics on the guns and shooting pattern. Did the kid wound his dad, go shoot TR, go back in the house and shoot his dad again, come back outside and shoot TR again? How could TR have not heard the shots if the kid was hiding in the bushes shooting towards the house? Not possible. The kid had to be inside. That means he then had to come OUT side to get to TR. TR had to see him and know what was happening.

Logistically - this just does not work out. I have drawn myself a picture and what we know so far does not fit. Maybe there are some typos in what we know? Maybe not, I'm waiting to see.

Also I would like to point out on the confession - what the kid confessed to, does not match the murder scene. This is an important clue when obtaining confessions and analyzing them for truth. It is my opinion that the kid was afraid his mother would yell at him, so he told the cops what they wanted to hear. He gave details that did not match up, but was doing his best to get it right so he wouldn't get in trouble.

Salem[/QUOTE]

I am confused. Are you talking about Tim Romans being shot outside or Vincent Romero being shot inside? Because as far as I have ever read no one has said that TIM also was shot in the left elbow. Tim was shot in the arm probably in the bicep, shoulder or forearm. The screen door opened toward the left where Tim was laying.

I don't think he was hiding outside the home when he killed his father. Tim told Tanya that Vincent had just walked in the door. Evidently at that when he entered his home he was still very ,much alive. The casings around his body, which was on the stairs, showed the crime happened on the stairs as he climbed them with his back to the shooter who was most likely at the bottom of the stairs.

It is totally consistent than he was hit in his left elbow. His elbow was behind him just like his back was when he was shot. The right arm would be closer to the wall and the left would have been out toward the railing and banister easier to hit.

Yes, he did do some blunders that is for sure and the DA will look for inconsistencies, just like they do in other cases. One glaring one was when he told them that when he discovered his dad's body and nudged him with his shoe, that VRs face was already bloody, then he said he shot him twice to keep him from suffering. The thing is VR would have to be already shot in the head for blood to be on his face. Imo, he nudged him after he fired the two final shots to his father's head to make sure he was dead.

There are so many variables where inside residential shots arent heard. It happens in other cases too and the weapon used in those were much higher caliber, even shotguns and no one around them heard a thing. I think the house was new and made good and tight. IMO the door was closed completely shut when VR was murdered and then reopened to call out to Tim.

And the ivy bush is right on the porch very close to the screen door. Who said he went in and out? I think he killed one and then he killed the other and then hightailed it to his friend's house.

imoo

 

[Ms Suzanne]

Ok,I think it was shock who said he suffered through the confession video's.I can really see why he said that.It's really irritating.They keep loudly bleeping out peoples names and loud background noise.The little boy has a soft voice.I really can't hear him too good.Are there transcripts of these confessions out yet?I am going to have to go over it a few times.

 

[Linda7NJ]

edited. It is my opinion that the kid was afraid his mother would yell at him, so he told the cops what they wanted to hear. He gave details that did not match up, but was doing his best to get it right so he wouldn't get in trouble.

Salem

The kid knew he was in trouble ...remember his comments about going to juvie?

 

[Shelby77]

You are right, they do, but I did read somewhere last night that some juvenile cases can have a jury trial but I have no idea where I read that now or which type of case. There must be an exception since Brewer asked for one but was denied.

Well that makes it even tougher. Judges are much more hard nosed and matter of fact. They don't look at a case with emotion but the evidence presented. And they sure DON'T buy into coincidences. lol

imo

OBE, I remember you mentioning this before, that Brewer's motion for a jury trial was denied, but where did you get that information? I've been on the Apache website since the day the very first document was put on there and I don't recall ever seeing that, even looked for it after after you said it before. Not saying it's not there, I'm sure I could of missed it, but the only reference I recall about hearing it denied came from you...

And IF it has been denied and you know this what are you talking about potential jurors and what they would believe anyway...

Not that it matters, I'm just curious :crazy:

 

[oceanblueeyes]

OBE, I remember you mentioning this before, that Brewer's motion for a jury trial was denied, but where did you get that information? I've been on the Apache website since the day the very first document was put on there and I don't recall ever seeing that, even looked for it after after you said it before. Not saying it's not there, I'm sure I could of missed it, but the only reference I recall about hearing it denied came from you...

And IF it has been denied and you know this what are you talking about potential jurors and what they would believe anyway...

Not that it matters, I'm just curious :crazy:

I mentioned a jury because Brewer had asked for one.

LOL Let me go wade through all those sections. It is there somewhere. Darn I just saw it yesterday and have already forgotten which one it was in. Thank goodness it isn't in the long transcripts. I do remember that much.

BRB.

imoo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

OBE, I remember you mentioning this before, that Brewer's motion for a jury trial was denied, but where did you get that information? I've been on the Apache website since the day the very first document was put on there and I don't recall ever seeing that, even looked for it after after you said it before.

Not that it matters, I'm just curious :crazy:

Here ya go.


http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/PREADJUDICATION HEARING.pdf

If it doesn't load it is Minute Entry-Pre-Adjudication Hearing.

 

[mostlylurking]

I'm just making a statement that people are fixed in their opinions on this case. If you leave his age out and just look at facts I think many would have a different opinion. I think the fact that this kid is 8 has clouded the case.

And, if you look at the real facts & eliminate the coerced statement, there is not enough confirmed evidence to have made an arrest.

I am not fixed in my opinion yet. Do I want to believe this child is innocent, yes. Do I know if he is? No. Do I know if he is not? No.

There is nothing but a coerced statement, with no miranda rights and no adult present as his representation, and NONE of those adults who were outside waiting for hiim were told they were allowed to be in with him if they wanted to.

If that tape had never made it to the public airways & the gag order were in place on everything & therefore he was not in custody, is there really enough information for him to be considered a suspect? No. Not anymore than all the other scenarios which have been postulated.

 

[mostlylurking]

The DA must want both charges to be filed later, like when he becomes 15, when he can be tried as an adult for both murders.

imoo

IMO, if charges are based on a crime committed at a certain age, then whenever the defendant is brought to trial, the case should be heard as if that person were the age at the time the crime was committed. Again, IMO, if you weren't competent to be tried at the time of the incident, then you should not be be considered competent to understand what you did in the first place. Therefore, trying you later as an adult is not a fair due process. Again. This is MOO. I know that laws are written various ways, etc., so I don't need the legaleze quoted. I'm just sayin'