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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #601
has there ever been a study done on kids who killed? Kids under the age of ten?
where are they now?, how are they now? this is not the first young child to kill and wont be the last, i would be interested in a study of those who have killed, were or were not punished and where and how they are today.
anyone know of one?
 
  • #602
It saddens me so many people want this boy to be innocent at any costs that they are willing to throw these victims under the bus. Even if they were horrible people (which I don't believe they were), they don't deserve to be gunned down. That is not what our society is about. And if that's where we are heading, God help us, it's the wrong road. If the evidence shows this kid did it, and I believe it will, then he deserves punishment, not a "time out" for bad behavior.

I don't know any poster here that has forgotten the murdered victims in this case. What I have read, and have written myself, are questions concerning the murder, how this investigation has been handled from the very beginning, and an 8 year old child. What I want is a case that is completely investigated with unbias and total fairness *for* the victims. If allowed to move forward, without all stones unturned, **THAT** will be total injustice done for ALL parties.

Another thought is that you cannot compare the intelligence of an 8 year old to an adult between the ages of 20-30. They absolutely have not learned the complete fundamentals of right/wrong and the impact their actions have. Any person who has had their own children know this as they had to help them learn over time. Heck, we still try to educate them when they are older!!!
 
  • #603
I would love for this child to be innocent, but not any cost. Not at the cost of truth. That just would not help. I also feel horrible for the victims and their families. I just feel that either way, this little boy is one of those victims. I think the evidence is pretty strong that this kid did it. I am not 100% sure, but close. However, the act of killing does not automatically cause a child to become a cold-blooded adult. He is a child. Period. He has the still developing brain of a child. He cannot forsee consequences as an adult does, due to lack of development in his frontal lobe. He cannot control impulses in the manner that adults can, also due to lack of development of his frontal lobe. If sociopathic, I linked to research that evidences that child psychopaths (same as sociopaths or kids with conduct disorders), CAN be treated, as their brains are still developing, unlike adults. However, I have not seen ONE case of a child near this age who killed his parent(s) and was diagnosed as a sociopath. Again, overwhelmingly, children, even older children who commit patricide, have suffered some form of egregious abuse. In a minority of cases, it appears they were children who just snapped either due to a mental issue or an inability to foresee consequences or control impulse. I have not heard of one case where a child who killed his parents was diagnosed as a sociopath (or any derivative thereof). I'm sure one exists but I have yet to see it, which must mean something.
Should there then be punishment for a child who kills? Remember, an 8 year old is only supposed to be on time-out for EIGHT MINUTES. That is because, an 8 year old will begin to forget why he is on time-out and/or the punishment loses meaning/effectiveness after a larger length of time. Again, this is due to the childish perception of child for whom a year is an eternity. So, do you think incarcerating this boy in a prison with older children (as there are not man little kids in jail), or isolating him from the rest of the prisoners, for years, is going to effectively punish this child? Or, is it meant to act as a societal deterrance for all those other little homicidal 8 year olds, because after all, they read the news at that age, right! (Saracasm intended). (Also, if he is a sociopath, it would not help at all. Such a kid would not be effect one bit by incarceration. He'd just turn into another Manson or Joseph Duncan, both of whom were incarcerated fro long periods as minors).
This is a child, therefore there is hope. He needs years of intensive mental health treatment, probably years of in-patient care. This will help understand what went wrong and will allow him to eventually understand the seriousness of what he has done, which, once he realizes it, could cause him to lose his mind. The competency rules, juvenile court and laws against putting minors to death, for example, are on the books for a reason, folks. And it's not because some crazy liberals created those laws. It is because we, as a society, understand that children are simply not the same as adults.

Beautifully stated, Gitana. :clap: Thank you...
 
  • #604
  • #605
I don't know any poster here that has forgotten the murdered victims in this case. What I have read, and have written myself, are questions concerning the murder, how this investigation has been handled from the very beginning, and an 8 year old child. What I want is a case that is completely investigated with unbias and total fairness *for* the victims. If allowed to move forward, without all stones unturned, **THAT** will be total injustice done for ALL parties.

Another thought is that you cannot compare the intelligence of an 8 year old to an adult between the ages of 20-30. They absolutely have not learned the complete fundamentals of right/wrong and the impact their actions have. Any person who has had their own children know this as they had to help them learn over time. Heck, we still try to educate them when they are older!!!

I don't think intelligence comes into play unless the boy's IQ is below the standard scale. We have seen kids around this age that have their own businesses already.

Since the AZ. legislators have enacted laws that children from the age of 8 can be charged with a crime imo it is more about, do they know right from wrong and the legislators are in agreement that a child of this age does know.

I agree with that. I think they know right from wrong even before the age of 8 or 9.

imoo
 
  • #606
Pretty much he'll just go home with his mother, maybe even to Mississippi where his mother lives. If the charges are dropped with prejudice, as it appears, it may be suggested that he get mental health care, but if the charges will be dropped, even that cannot be forced.

It's sad how this is turning out for both the boy and the victims.
Thanks for the answer, Trino - and I agree, it's very sad for both the boy and the victims!! I sure hope whether it's "ordered" or not, that the boy gets serious psychiatric help!!!
 
  • #607
I don't think intelligence comes into play unless the boy's IQ is below the standard scale. We have seen kids around this age that have their own businesses already.

Since the AZ. legislators have enacted laws that children from the age of 8 can be charged with a crime imo it is more about, do they know right from wrong and the legislators are in agreement that a child of this age does know.

I agree with that. I think they know right from wrong even before the age of 8 or 9.

imoo

Since it's apparent that intelligence is taking literally concerning IQ, how about this. 8 year old age appropriate thinking. FWIW, just how many 8 year olds have started their own business? How many have? Please, you cannot compare a "regular" 8 year old with ~some~ very few that have begun their own businesses. With the help of adults. At least they were given legal advice to protect their interests. ...
 
  • #608
Since it's apparent that intelligence is taking literally concerning IQ, how about this. 8 year old age appropriate thinking. FWIW, just how many 8 year olds have started their own business? How many have? Please, you cannot compare a "regular" 8 year old with ~some~ very few that have begun their own businesses. With the help of adults. At least they were given legal advice to protect their interests. ...

I really don't know. I used that as just a reference that 8 years old are not all a cookie cutter design.

What I am saying is, you cannot judge a child's intelligence or understanding, just based on their age and the standard used in AZ. where those 8 years old and older can be charged with a crime, is based more on whether the child has the ability to understand right from wrong imo.

Do you think children of that age do understand right from wrong?

imo
 
  • #609
I really don't know. I used that as just a reference that 8 years old are not all a cookie cutter design.

What I am saying is, you cannot judge a child's intelligence or understanding, just based on their age and the standard used in AZ. where those 8 years old and older can be charged with a crime, is based more on whether the child has the ability to understand right from wrong imo.

Do you think children of that age do understand right from wrong?

imo

OBE, are 8 year old children different in AZ than in any other state? I doubt it. Yes, you can judge a child's understanding based on their age. They do not have the capability to process as even young teenagers do. If the child of that age is taught the ***basics*** of right and wrong, yes. I think they "get it". That is all they can take in and understand. However, it is the seriousness of wrong (and right) that they do not have the age, knowledge, or experience to understand the ramifications of. How could they being so very young and not living a life of responsibility yet?
 
  • #610
The juvenile system is established for both. Punishment and rehabilitation which includes mental therapy and counseling.

May I ask, are you a defense attorney? Just curious.

imoo

No. I have stated repeatedly in my posts that I do not do criminal law. Let me add, I could never be a defense attorney. I could not work to get the guilty off.
However, I have been a child advocate (lawyer for kids rights). Now I'm just doing general family law. I'm pretty strong in my feelings about crime, especially crimes against children, women, the elderly or anyone who is vulnerable. Your question seems to infer that I am soft on crime. On the contrary. I would not be on Websleuths if I was. I just happen to think an 8 year old little boy should not be treated like an adult in the criminal justice system. Thankfully, our society appears to agree with me.
 
  • #611
OBE, are 8 year old children different in AZ than in any other state? I doubt it. Yes, you can judge a child's understanding based on their age. They do not have the capability to process as even young teenagers do. If the child of that age is taught the ***basics*** of right and wrong, yes. I think they "get it". That is all they can take in and understand. However, it is the seriousness of wrong (and right) that they do not have the age, knowledge, or experience to understand the ramifications of. How could they being so very young and not living a life of responsibility yet?

OL, I wouldn't think they are that different. In my own state the age a person can be charged with a crime is also 8 years old.

I am not following you on the ramifications part though. I don't necessarily think that a person has to know the full ramifications of their wrongful acts, such as what punishment will be given to them if they do the wrongful acts. Although he did seem to know that he would be going to juvie because of it. So he did seem to be aware that there would be harsh ramifications.

He even knew it was wrong to go behind his father's back and mess with the guns without his father being there. He speaks of that in his interview so it seem logical to me that with these acts of murder, he would fully understand that they were grievously wrong.

imoo
 
  • #612
No. I have stated repeatedly in my posts that I do not do criminal law. Let me add, I could never be a defense attorney. I could not work to get the guilty off.
However, I have been a child advocate (lawyer for kids rights). Now I'm just doing general family law. I'm pretty strong in my feelings about crime, especially crimes against children, women, the elderly or anyone who is vulnerable. Your question seems to infer that I am soft on crime. On the contrary. I would not be on Websleuths if I was. I just happen to think an 8 year old little boy should not be treated like an adult in the criminal justice system. Thankfully, our society appears to agree with me.

LOL, I think you infer too much.

As far as I am aware this boy is not being treated as an adult. His case is being tried in juvenile court not adult court.

I simply asked because you seemed to want no punishment for the boy, only therapy. I didn't figure you would be a Prosecutor with that take, so that is why I asked you if you are a defense attorney.

That's all.
 
  • #613
Thanks for the answer, Trino - and I agree, it's very sad for both the boy and the victims!! I sure hope whether it's "ordered" or not, that the boy gets serious psychiatric help!!!

I agree SieSie.I hope he gets the help he needs too.It's very sad all around.
 
  • #614
Just out of curiosity, how does one punish an eight year old for such a serious crime? No matter if he understand in his eight/nine year old way, that a gun can take life, I don't think he has the capacity to truly understand the ramifications of his actions. If guilty, with no extenuating circumstances, how do you punish such young child?
 
  • #615
Just out of curiosity, how does one punish an eight year old for such a serious crime? No matter if he understand in his eight/nine year old way, that a gun can take life, I don't think he has the capacity to truly understand the ramifications of his actions. If guilty, with no extenuating circumstances, how do you punish such young child?

It struck me that he did know. He told them he knew he was going to juvie. Even made me think he had already thought of that beforehand.

I am not sure what you mean when you say "no extenuating circumstances" so if I have misunderstood you I apologize in advance.

You mean legally for the State. Or do you mean any mitigating circumstances on the boy's part?

I have no doubt whatsoever that if an adult was the defendant in this case the DA would ask for the death penalty to be applied.

There was premeditation.
There was laying in wait.
There was the use of a firearm to commit the murders.
The heinousness of the crimes.
Double homicides.

But you are right, this case would be a dilemma no matter where it happened.

Because of the defendant's young age, where he more than likely cannot fully assist in his defense, leaves this case in disarray. So if he is deemed age incompetent then the two murdered men nor their families will ever see even a glimpse of justice for their loved ones.



imoo
 
  • #616
but this is a great example of how utterly ineptly this court has and will continue to handle this case...

ST. JOHNS, Ariz. — A judge has denied a defense motion to appoint a therapist for a 9-year-old boy accused of killing his father and another man, saying defense attorneys did not adequately address his concerns.

More here:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,475004,00.html
 
  • #617
but this is a great example of how utterly ineptly this court has and will continue to handle this case...

ST. JOHNS, Ariz. — A judge has denied a defense motion to appoint a therapist for a 9-year-old boy accused of killing his father and another man, saying defense attorneys did not adequately address his concerns.More here:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,475004,00.html

I can somewhat understand the judge's concerns. One problem is the therapist would not have to testify. The story said both the mother and grandmother could be called to testify. Why not the therapist?
 
  • #618
I can somewhat understand the judge's concerns. One problem is the therapist would not have to testify. The story said both the mother and grandmother could be called to testify. Why not the therapist?

The therapist is requested to help the child. Therefore, anything that the therapist/child discuss is privilaged information between them. The DA does have the right to request own court appointed therapist for evaluation I believe. Though, I could be mistaken.....
 
  • #619
but this is a great example of how utterly ineptly this court has and will continue to handle this case...

ST. JOHNS, Ariz. — A judge has denied a defense motion to appoint a therapist for a 9-year-old boy accused of killing his father and another man, saying defense attorneys did not adequately address his concerns.

More here:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,475004,00.html

Why? The defense attorneys know perfectly well that they have to well define the motion for it to be okayed by a Judge. The attorneys know full well that Judge Roca is not going to sign off on something that has no specifics. And from the motion, this therapist is going to cost more per hour than what is designated for a PHD, which this person is not.

It shows me that Judge Roca is trying to be fair to all parties, including the county that will have to pay for such treatment. Brewer/Wood didn't even list how often he is to be seen.

imoo
 
  • #620
The therapist is requested to help the child. Therefore, anything that the therapist/child discuss is privileged information between them. The DA does have the right to request own court appointed therapist for evaluation I believe. Though, I could be mistaken.....

I am not real sure either but I seem to remember they can only do so if the defendant is going to use a diminished capacity or some type of mental defense. Then the State is allowed to have their own expert evaluate them and the court often appoints a non biased, court appointed forensic psychiatrist/psychologist also, irrc.

imoo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
63
Guests online
1,664
Total visitors
1,727

Forum statistics

Threads
632,758
Messages
18,631,262
Members
243,279
Latest member
Tweety1807
Back
Top