AZ - Timothy Romans, 39, & Vincent Romero, 29, slain, St Johns, 5 Nov 2008 - #4

[fran]

If "others" killed these two men, I do not know why the child never indicated that in his tape confession. I understand that the confession was probably legally improper, but it still provides some limited insight into this child that is fair to consider. He did not appear frightened or even particularly upset.

I don't know if you've watched ALL of the tape and read different versions of the transcript of the child's ALLEGED confession, but the child did refer to 'others' who may have done this and 'who would do this?' and 'bad people' must have done this and 'shoot my father?' and 'why would I shoot Tim?' and ALL that,..................ONCE they told the child 'YOU did shoot a gun' and he finally confessed,...............when asked where his dad was when he shot him, 'laying on the ground,' and where was Tim when you shot him, 'laying on the ground,'

Yeah, sure,............confession,.............NOT!

Just imagine if it were your child or your grandson who'd come across two brutally murdered men, one of them his own father, he was running around the house not knowing what he was doing, runs to a neighbor to call police, finally when his step mom arrives he's crying, taken to a neighbors where he went into the back bedroom and layed down, then questioned by LE, then went to his grandma's and cuddled with her throughout the night crying off and on.....................only to be taken in first thing the next morning for more questioning and then being told he 'DID shoot a gun,'...........next think he's taken in handcuffs and thrown behind bars.

A traumitized 8 yo, 'WHAT were they thinking?'

SHAME.....................
fran

 

[fran]

Where does this "apparently afraid the 'bad men' will come back to get him." coming from?

I think she will simply say he is having difficulty adjusting to detention. No big surprise there. grown adult men often cry themselves to sleep in their cells. Detention isn't supposed to be a Disney Vacation.

IMHO, I hope by the time this child is cleared and is done with the St. John's PD, they'll wish they had sent him on a Disney vacation. Bet the people of St. Johns will not be too happy having to pay out for 'false arrest' of an 8 yo either.

Course, that's just my opinion,

fran

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Where does this "apparently afraid the 'bad men' will come back to get him." coming from?

I think she will simply say he is having difficulty adjusting to detention. No big surprise there. grown adult men often cry themselves to sleep in their cells. Detention isn't supposed to be a Disney Vacation.

Brewer states why she is being called.


http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/02/04/20090204childcharged.html

The attorneys are looking to the director to provide an assessment of how the boy is faring in jail among other detainees who are at least a couple of years older, Brewer added.

But why is it necessary to call her if this boy is going to remain out of detention anyway and soon set free?

imoo

 

[fran]

Brewer states why she is being called.


http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/02/04/20090204childcharged.html

The attorneys are looking to the director to provide an assessment of how the boy is faring in jail among other detainees who are at least a couple of years older, Brewer added.

But why is it necessary to call her if this boy is going to remain out of detention anyway and soon set free?

imoo

From the same article:

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/02/04/20090204childcharged.html

Defense attorney Benjamin Brewer said some "behind-the-scenes wrangling" forced Thursday's hearing to be pushed back a week to Feb. 12. He declined to elaborate.

"We aren't going to delay something for no reason," Brewer said. "There's always a reason to what we're doing. We're in a position where we can't comment on a lot of that."

 

[southcitymom]

I don't know if you've watched ALL of the tape and read different versions of the transcript of the child's ALLEGED confession, but the child did refer to 'others' who may have done this and 'who would do this?' and 'bad people' must have done this and 'shoot my father?' and 'why would I shoot Tim?' and ALL that,..................ONCE they told the child 'YOU did shoot a gun' and he finally confessed,...............when asked where his dad was when he shot him, 'laying on the ground,' and where was Tim when you shot him, 'laying on the ground,'

Yeah, sure,............confession,.............NOT!

Just imagine if it were your child or your grandson who'd come across two brutally murdered men, one of them his own father, he was running around the house not knowing what he was doing, runs to a neighbor to call police, finally when his step mom arrives he's crying, taken to a neighbors where he went into the back bedroom and layed down, then questioned by LE, then went to his grandma's and cuddled with her throughout the night crying off and on.....................only to be taken in first thing the next morning for more questioning and then being told he 'DID shoot a gun,'...........next think he's taken in handcuffs and thrown behind bars.

A traumitized 8 yo, 'WHAT were they thinking?'

SHAME.....................
fran

I have done that, fran, several times. But I come away with different impressions than you do. However thanks for reminding me about when he talked about "others."

No piece of me sensed a traumatized child in that video or written transcripts. And I do know people react differently to trauma.

Whether or not that confession is legally valid (and, as a general rule, I don't think a child this age should be questioned without at least having an adult caretaker present), it is a very interesting thing to consider in discussing the case.

I am glad the child is home with his mother, but I do believe that he was the one who pulled the trigger.

I'm not up to date on the forensics - I believe we are still waiting on those results, right? I wonder if they will be made public now that there is a gad order on the case.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

From the same article:

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/02/04/20090204childcharged.html

Defense attorney Benjamin Brewer said some "behind-the-scenes wrangling" forced Thursday's hearing to be pushed back a week to Feb. 12. He declined to elaborate.

"We aren't going to delay something for no reason," Brewer said. "There's always a reason to what we're doing. We're in a position where we can't comment on a lot of that."

What does that have to do with calling the Detention Administrator to testify how he is adapting in detention?

Of course there is wrangling going on behind the scene. One doesn't just wrangle by themselves.

Also of course there is always a reason for everything but we have no idea what those reasons may be.

And you didn't answer my question. If the defense attorneys are so sure that the boy is going to be released for good then why the need to call a detention administer at all to tell how poorly he is adapting?



imoo

 

[southcitymom]

What does that have to do with calling the Detention Administrator to testifying how is adapting in detention?

Of course there is wrangling going on behind the scene. One doesn't just wrangle by themselves.

Also of course there is always a reason for everything but we have no idea what those reasons may be.

And you didn't answer my question. If the defense attorneys are so sure that the boy is going to be released for good then why the need to call a detention administer at all to tell how poorly he is adapting?



imoo

Just catching up on the latest with thus case, OBE. And I agree that there would be no need to call a Detention Center rep if the child's attorney was convinced he was going to be released for good.

 

[fran]

I have done that, fran, several times. But I come away with different impressions than you do. However thanks for reminding me about when he talked about "others."

No piece of me sensed a traumatized child in that video or written transcripts. And I do know people react differently to trauma.

Whether or not that confession is legally valid (and, as a general rule, I don't think a child this age should be questioned without at least having an adult caretaker present), it is a very interesting thing to consider in discussing the case.

I am glad the child is home with his mother, but I do believe that he was the one who pulled the trigger.

I'm not up to date on the forensics - I believe we are still waiting on those results, right? I wonder if they will be made public now that there is a gad order on the case.

Just for curiousity sake, what makes you believe he pulled the trigger?
1. We do NOT know what the murder weapon was?
2. There's been nothing to tell us the child was home when the shooting occurred?
3. The child said he was approaching and saw a white car speeding away from the house? LE did NOT look for this car.
4. There's an automatic 22 rifle missing from the home. Aren't you curious where it is?
5. Wouldn't you like to know where the fil was when he talked to Vince just minutes before he was murdered?
6. Shouldn't we know 'which' grandpa it was that came after school sometimes? Was it the grandpa who has a white car 'just like' the one the boy saw leaving the scene? or was it the grandpa who's gun is missing? or ???
7. What about the ex-fellow employee that didn't like the two victims? He drives a small white pick-up. Tim got his foreman job. The guy was an ex-ranger military and hadn't been the same since his son was murdered a year prior in a bar room fight?
8. What about Tim's cousin who shot a hole in Tim's truck? The cousin that is on drugs? Could Vince have caught him robbing the house? Could the cousin have 'borrowed' Tim's mom's car. Tim's mom does have a 'white car?'
9. Why won't Tim's wife talk to LE? I know her attorney is a 'civil attorney,' but the last time St. John's LE tried to talk to her, she told them to talk to her lawyer. Why?
10. Why was Vince's wife going to parties just weeks after he was murdered?
11. Could it be Vince's wife's sister or one of her friends. She has been arrested for drug possession?
12. What about the witness who saw two trucks and three guys standing in front of the murder scene, just about the time of the murders? Do you think we should just assume it was LE he saw, and NOT look into the possibility it was the murderer and the victims?

The only forensics back is finger prints on the box of ammunition, which doesn't say anything because the item was from the home where the boy resided. Vince's prints were probably on that box too, as well as his wife's?

Why haven't we seen the forensics from the spent shells and the gun. Not the ballistics per se, but the finger print evidence? Could it be because the boy's prints aren't on them?

We should NOT assume anything until everything is back.

I will just agree to disagree about the boy's demeanor as well. From what I read, at different times, he was very emotional. It just doesn't look good to the pros or LE if they spell it out. But,........it's there. You just need to look.

JMHO
fran

 

[mrrogers]

I don't know if you've watched ALL of the tape and read different versions of the transcript of the child's ALLEGED confession, but the child did refer to 'others' who may have done this and 'who would do this?' and 'bad people' must have done this and 'shoot my father?' and 'why would I shoot Tim?' and ALL that,..................ONCE they told the child 'YOU did shoot a gun' and he finally confessed,...............when asked where his dad was when he shot him, 'laying on the ground,' and where was Tim when you shot him, 'laying on the ground,'

Yeah, sure,............confession,.............NOT!

Just imagine if it were your child or your grandson who'd come across two brutally murdered men, one of them his own father, he was running around the house not knowing what he was doing, runs to a neighbor to call police, finally when his step mom arrives he's crying, taken to a neighbors where he went into the back bedroom and layed down, then questioned by LE, then went to his grandma's and cuddled with her throughout the night crying off and on.....................only to be taken in first thing the next morning for more questioning and then being told he 'DID shoot a gun,'...........next think he's taken in handcuffs and thrown behind bars.

A traumitized 8 yo, 'WHAT were they thinking?'

SHAME.....................
fran

on a recent video report one of the principals involved fleetingly almost by accident referrd to a new suspect but would not elaborate further when questioned. i think for this thing to be solved some other agency is going to have to investigate. the police quit investigating at 11am the day after cr was arrested

 

[Linda7NJ]

on a recent video report one of the principals involved fleetingly almost by accident referrd to a new suspect but would not elaborate further when questioned. i think for this thing to be solved some other agency is going to have to investigate. the police quit investigating at 11am the day after cr was arrested

Please provide a link to this supposed video report.

 

[southcitymom]

.....

We should NOT assume anything until everything is back.

I will just agree to disagree about the boy's demeanor as well. From what I read, at different times, he was very emotional. It just doesn't look good to the pros or LE if they spell it out. But,........it's there. You just need to look.

JMHO
fran

Well, we all make assumptions in every case we discuss here way before the evidence is back. And I agree that the boy has been emotional in Court and at others times. He is a child and he is scared - I don't doubt that for a second.

Why do you say the child was not at home when it occurred - Tim's wife who was on the phone with him said he told her the little boy was calling him inside. I guess by some of your questions, you are intimating his wife is hinky or not to be trusted.

I am interested in the forensics, but in many cases that information is not released to the general pubic for a while - sometimes, not even until trial. I don't consider that unusual.

My opinion that the boy pulled the trigger is based primarily on his confession in conjunction with the phone call between Tim and his wife and other things I have read. It makes sense to me - as much sense as it can make I felt that way early in the case and nothing else I have read has changed my mind. I don't claim to have all the evidence or facts,of course - none of us do. These are just my impressions.

I'll be delighted if I turn out to be wrong.

 

[gitana1]

Any updates on this case? Kid still in jail? Any info on if he may be released pending trial? if so, when? Thanks!

 

[fran]

FWIW, it is possible that Tim's wife did in fact hear the child call Tim. But NOT from inside the house................it's kind of confusing, but if you listen to and read the various interpretations of the boy's alleged confession it goes something like this.........

The boy was approaching the house from around the corner, actually from a side street. That's why he didn't see his dad and Tim arrive at the house. They didn't pass him and he wasn't watching the cars ahead.

As he approached his home, four doors down, he could see Tim's truck in front through the trees. Somewhere in here is where it gets confusing, he saw someone from outside go towards the house. Officers didn't ask follow-up questions.

The boy then said two doors down he called Tim's name and then said he could see Tim laying in the doorway. When asked why he called him from so far away, the child said 'because he THOUGHT he 'heard' Tim.' Then he saw a white car drive FAST. All white, small car, like grandpa's only without back rims,.......or black wheels (no hubcaps).

No further follow-up by LE on the car, no further question about WHO? it was he saw going into the house or if he saw someone coming out.

Just imagine the child running from two doors down, calling Tim's name and finding him shot, blood all over. He runs into the house calling his dad's name, then jutting up the stairs only to find his dad laying in a pool of blood. The child lies next to his dad, it could have been only seconds, but to an 8 yo, those seconds with his dead father's body could have seen like an eternity.

He said to himself, 'who could have done this?' He was AFRAID the bad men would come back. He thought it could be the 'bad people' down the street because they smoke and act all bad and drive fast.

The child 'forgets' he has a cell phone in his room, but runs to the safety of a neighbors to tell them what he found at home and to call the police.

Did the child handle the single-bolt action 22 gun? Who knows! At this point, I don't think even he knows what he did when he was running around the house with two dead bodies, 'white smoke' in the air, the smell of death.......

This child was and may STILL be in shock.
Where are these pros and St. John's PD humanity?
What were they thinking?

Good grief,

fran

 

[fran]

Any updates on this case? Kid still in jail? Any info on if he may be released pending trial? if so, when? Thanks!

Yes, LOTS happening,...........BEHIND the scenes. Now all court hearings are either postponed or vacated (until further notice).........

The child is on 'furlough,' at home with his mom, Eryn. Until next week, that is. THEN, who knows?

Hopefully, LE has returned to investigating this crime, because they sure didn't do much investigating BEFORE they arrested the boy. Maybe this time, they could get it RIGHT..........

JMHO
fran

 

[southcitymom]

I appreciate your looking at different possible scenarios that don't point to the child, Fran. I truly do. It's just not my interpretation of the tapes and transcripts. I think it's a stretch.

I have an 8-year-old son and know lots more little boys this age. This child's demeanor on tape and the different stories he tells, all of it - it's just not indicative of a child in shock over finding his dead father and friend. That's strictly my interpretation, but I feel strongly about it.

I don't think LE has flubbed this to the point that they have imprisoned and charged a child with a crime of this magnitude without enough pieces to believe he is guilty. Thus far, LE's theories make sense to me.

What is up with this child getting some psychological help? Is he undergoing any therapy - court-ordered or at the pros or defense's request or otherwise?

 

[gitana1]

Yes, LOTS happening,...........BEHIND the scenes. Now all court hearings are either postponed or vacated (until further notice).........

The child is on 'furlough,' at home with his mom, Eryn. Until next week, that is. THEN, who knows?

Hopefully, LE has returned to investigating this crime, because they sure didn't do much investigating BEFORE they arrested the boy. Maybe this time, they could get it RIGHT..........

JMHO
fran

Thanks, fran. How long has the kid been with his mom?

 

[fran]

Thanks, fran. How long has the kid been with his mom?

y/w gitana!

I think the boy went with Eryn either Thursday or Friday of last week. There's some sort of hearing next week, so we'll see what happens then. At least he's home for now.


fran

 

[fran]

I appreciate your looking at different possible scenarios that don't point to the child, Fran. I truly do. It's just not my interpretation of the tapes and transcripts. I think it's a stretch.

I have an 8-year-old son and know lots more little boys this age. This child's demeanor on tape and the different stories he tells, all of it - it's just not indicative of a child in shock over finding his dead father and friend. That's strictly my interpretation, but I feel strongly about it.

I don't think LE has flubbed this to the point that they have imprisoned and charged a child with a crime of this magnitude without enough pieces to believe he is guilty. Thus far, LE's theories make sense to me.

What is up with this child getting some psychological help? Is he undergoing any therapy - court-ordered or at the pros or defense's request or otherwise?

I haven't been looking for anything other than the child, southcitymom, it's just that's where everything points, IMHO. There's way too many unanswered questions to tell who did this crime. Way too many additional POI.

I live with my 8 yo grandson, so I too know several children this age. I'm not saying all of them could be talked into a 'false confession,' but I honestly do believe this could happen,........and even to my own grandson. Children this age are very gullible and can be manipulated very easily. At least the children I know this age.

I personally feel the St. John's version of the crime is implausible. I cannot see a child this age being able to carry out such a crime with a single-bolt action 22 gun, against two able body men, almost simultaneously. There's no way he could carry that out without one of them getting even close to him AND not dropping one single shell.

It's my belief that St John's PD rushed to judgment on this case and did NOT know the facts. They THOUGHT the boy's gun was the weapon used in this crime, but I'm willing to bet that by now, they've found out the contrary. I still think it's most likely the grandfather's 22 automatic, that's still missing, as far as I know. IF the child's fingerprints aren't on those spent shell casings, that's game over for trying this child for this crime.

Just because evidence was submitted, doesn't mean it's pointing towards this child. Everything isn't always as it MAY seem. My daughter is a forensic chemist and testifies in different states for the pros. Sometimes the evidence, ............just is NOT there.

I'm not sure about treatment for the boy. I know they had some hearings about it earlier and the person seeing him was able to talk to him through a window. I'm not sure how that's going now.

JMHO
fran

 

[Fairy1]

I haven't been looking for anything other than the child, southcitymom, it's just that's where everything points, IMHO. There's way too many unanswered questions to tell who did this crime. Way too many additional POI.

I live with my 8 yo grandson, so I too know several children this age. I'm not saying all of them could be talked into a 'false confession,' but I honestly do believe this could happen,........and even to my own grandson. Children this age are very gullible and can be manipulated very easily. At least the children I know this age.

I personally feel the St. John's version of the crime is implausible. I cannot see a child this age being able to carry out such a crime with a single-bolt action 22 gun, against two able body men, almost simultaneously. There's no way he could carry that out without one of them getting even close to him AND not dropping one single shell.

It's my belief that St John's PD rushed to judgment on this case and did NOT know the facts. They THOUGHT the boy's gun was the weapon used in this crime, but I'm willing to bet that by now, they've found out the contrary. I still think it's most likely the grandfather's 22 automatic, that's still missing, as far as I know. IF the child's fingerprints aren't on those spent shell casings, that's game over for trying this child for this crime.

Just because evidence was submitted, doesn't mean it's pointing towards this child. Everything isn't always as it MAY seem. My daughter is a forensic chemist and testifies in different states for the pros. Sometimes the evidence, ............just is NOT there.

I'm not sure about treatment for the boy. I know they had some hearings about it earlier and the person seeing him was able to talk to him through a window. I'm not sure how that's going now.

JMHO
fran

Totally agree with you Fran. Unless this boy is a genious - and I don't think we've seen any evidence of that either - it just doesn't make any sense. Children at this age generally have a difficult time articulating their thoughts and feelings. I can interpret his demeanor in whatever way makes sense to me, but I am not an 8-year-old child in his circumstances.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Just for curiosity sake, what makes you believe he pulled the trigger?
1. We do NOT know what the murder weapon was?
2. There's been nothing to tell us the child was home when the shooting occurred?
3. The child said he was approaching and saw a white car speeding away from the house? LE did NOT look for this car.
4. There's an automatic 22 rifle missing from the home. Aren't you curious where it is?
5. Wouldn't you like to know where the fil was when he talked to Vince just minutes before he was murdered?
6. Shouldn't we know 'which' grandpa it was that came after school sometimes? Was it the grandpa who has a white car 'just like' the one the boy saw leaving the scene? or was it the grandpa who's gun is missing? or ???
7. What about the ex-fellow employee that didn't like the two victims? He drives a small white pick-up. Tim got his foreman job. The guy was an ex-ranger military and hadn't been the same since his son was murdered a year prior in a bar room fight?
8. What about Tim's cousin who shot a hole in Tim's truck? The cousin that is on drugs? Could Vince have caught him robbing the house? Could the cousin have 'borrowed' Tim's mom's car. Tim's mom does have a 'white car?'
9. Why won't Tim's wife talk to LE? I know her attorney is a 'civil attorney,' but the last time St. John's LE tried to talk to her, she told them to talk to her lawyer. Why?
10. Why was Vince's wife going to parties just weeks after he was murdered?
11. Could it be Vince's wife's sister or one of her friends. She has been arrested for drug possession?
12. What about the witness who saw two trucks and three guys standing in front of the murder scene, just about the time of the murders? Do you think we should just assume it was LE he saw, and NOT look into the possibility it was the murderer and the victims?

The only forensics back is finger prints on the box of ammunition, which doesn't say anything because the item was from the home where the boy resided. Vince's prints were probably on that box too, as well as his wife's?

Why haven't we seen the forensics from the spent shells and the gun. Not the ballistics per se, but the finger print evidence? Could it be because the boy's prints aren't on them?

We should NOT assume anything until everything is back.

I will just agree to disagree about the boy's demeanor as well. From what I read, at different times, he was very emotional. It just doesn't look good to the pros or LE if they spell it out. But,........it's there. You just need to look.

JMHO
fran

1. And we don't know if there was another weapon. We do know it was a 22. and the statement given by the neighbors who heard the shots is consistent with a single bolt action rifle that has a "pop" and then a "delay" each time....and is not consistent with a semi automatic or automatic.

2. The child has no alibi as to his whereabouts from the time he got off the bus until he went to the neighbors in back of him. He was conveniently not seen as he did his multiple walkabout. Which means he very likely went home and waited for his dad. He would know the approximate time he arrived as it was said that Vinnie and Tim get off around 4:30 everyday.

3. The police did try to find who drove a white car.

4. We have no clue if a gun is missing. The gun did not belong to Vinnie, it very well may have been picked up prior to this happening.

5. No, I have no need to wonder where the fil was at the time he called. They have the cell records and can tell which tower pinged when the call was made.

6. The boy did not say it was his grandfather's car, he was describing it being "white" like his granddaddy's. He would know his car by sight.

7. Lots of coworkers don't like it each other. People get fired and someone else becomes the foreman. A car is not a truck and the boy would know the difference.

8. The shot to Tim's truck happened on the reservation at a party in San Carlos. The caliber was not the same as the weapon used to commit the murders.

9. I think Tanya was extremely upset upon learning of the alleged affair and left the room out of raw emotions. I do believe she is in communication with the DA, since that time, imo.

10. Irrelevant. IMO she has an iron clad alibi.

11. There was no robbery. No drugs found in the home nor in both of their systems at autopsy. No evidence to support that drugs were being used or sold. Tiffany said they did not do drugs. I believe her because the evidence bolsters her statement.

12. That has been cleared up and were people that were with the Davis' at the crime scene.

All the forensics that we are aware of is they found his fingerprints on the box of bullets and GSR on his clothing. Both does not point away from this boy.

We haven't seen the actual results because all we ever see is the cover sheet to the supplemental disclosures. With almost 400 pages of documents from the DPS investigation and a 26 page lab report, I do believe the results are back and there is some wrangling going on behind the scene.

I saw no emotion in this child until he knew his story wasn't going to wash and he was going to juvie. Then he cried for himself. Before then he was very chatty and engaging. Seeming to feel no pressure at all. He did not even show one ounce of sadness when he talked about his dad.



imo