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

[Trino]

One thing which has not been discussed and which we'll probably never know is the boy's mental capacity. I wonder if he may have been a special education child. It found it odd that the father asked his priest if he should buy a rifle for the boy.

 

[chiperoni]

The domestic disturbance calls were from V and his first wife, Eryn. No evidence of drugs was found either on the property or the men.

Why does MUST there be more to this? Is it because it's never happened before?

Trino from what I understand not all vehicles were searched immediately. Could you give me a link that LE searched all vehicles that were on the property. They have already made some major mistakes. One major mistake is the illegal confession that was thrown out. There is more to this because some people choose to believe that an eight year old child would not deliberately and calculatingly hunt their father down and an innocent roommate after school. All the reasons have been given and we don't need to rehash this. I understand your opinion and definitely want to debate in a reasonable manner. It looks like the Romero child has been granted another furlough.http://ktar.com/?nid=6&sid=1034443

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Romans spokesperson speaks out.

Says this is not a case where the boy stoled a candy bar from a store.

John said boy is on furlough for a week.

Competency hearing is set for Feb. 13th.

Motion to dismiss is set up for next Thursday.


http://www.abc15.com/mediacenter/[email protected]




imoo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Trino from what I understand not all vehicles were searched immediately. Could you give me a link that LE searched all vehicles that were on the property. They have already made some major mistakes. One major mistake is the illegal confession that was thrown out. There is more to this because some people choose to believe that an eight year old child would not deliberately and calculatingly hunt their father down and an innocent roommate after school. All the reasons have been given and we don't need to rehash this. I understand your opinion and definitely want to debate in a reasonable manner. It looks like the Romero child has been granted another furlough.http://ktar.com/?nid=6&sid=1034443

The Judge did not throw out the confession. The DA agreed not to use it unless he testifies which he won't imo.

There was no vehicle at the crime scene but Tim's truck. It was checked.

imoo

 

[azmama]

Romans spokesperson speaks out.

Says this is not a case where the boy stoled a candy bar from a store.

John said boy is on furlough for a week.

imoo

His "opinion" on the matter means nothing, so what? It is not a legal opinion, it is not a professional opinion. In as much as any of us could go in front of the camera and give our opinion on the matter, I give it no merit.

The boy should have been out for a while now, and I do not believe the judge is doing it by the goodness of his heart, there are petitions etc on this and it is getting a lot more press time, LAWS must be followed, on how prisoners are kept, and why, even by the St Johns crappy system.

The lawsuit following this, if the boy is exonerated will be HUGE!

 

[Bobbisangel]

Was Tiffany with Tim all the time to know if he didn't take drugs...It has not been positively verified who was in the house right after the murders. Were the vehicles searched right away? According to a local news article Tim was a "known drug dealer". If Tim headed to the bar everyday after work I guess that really shows he was a great roomer and responsible member of the household. Was it really only Monday-Wednesday nights he stayed? Friends of his wife have said that he moved off the Apache San Pedro Reservation and that he had met someone else and was divorcing. Mr. Romero had to be aware of all this drama if he was living in his home.

From what I remember Tim was suspected of selling drugs at one time but it was never proven and he was never charged. So...maybe he was and maybe he wasn't...who knows. It's unfair to accuse someone of something that even the LE couldn't prove one way or another. For all we know that might have been in the 90's too.

Maybe Tim hung out at the bars for a few hours each night in order to give the family he was staying with their privacy and time to be together without a house guest there all of the time. Remember...the couple had only been married since September. Still newlyweds. Just because a guy hangs out at a bar doesn't make him a drunk. We have no idea if he drank one beer or 12.
Some people hang out at a fovorite bar for the company. I don't know about Tim planning on divorcing his wife for some other gal. Maybe he was or maybe some gal had her eye on him and thought he was going to.

 

[Bobbisangel]

His "opinion" on the matter means nothing, so what? It is not a legal opinion, it is not a professional opinion. In as much as any of us could go in front of the camera and give our opinion on the matter, I give it no merit.

The boy should have been out for a while now, and I do not believe the judge is doing it by the goodness of his heart, there are petitions etc on this and it is getting a lot more press time, LAWS must be followed, on how prisoners are kept, and why, even by the St Johns crappy system.

The lawsuit following this, if the boy is exonerated will be HUGE!

The man who spoke is a spokes person for Tim's family. They do have the right to give an opinion about how they feel about the boy getting a week out of Juvy. Evidentally they feel that the boy is the shooter.

If the evidence all points to the boy why should he get away without any consequences at all? If the evidence proves that this boy planned to murder his dad and Tim then that is pretty scary I think and especially at that young age. And if the murders were over the boy not bringing his homework home like he was told to do and he got disciplined for it then that is scary too. Maybe the boy didn't think he should get swats when he didn't do what dad told him to do but it shouldn't be something that a kid murders their parent and a friend over. Now days kids are killing their parents over anything that they believe or imagine is wrong or because they want something or for any pitiful reason. It's pretty scary. Kids that are killing are getting younger and younger every day.

 

[Trino]

His "opinion" on the matter means nothing, so what? It is not a legal opinion, it is not a professional opinion. In as much as any of us could go in front of the camera and give our opinion on the matter, I give it no merit.

The boy should have been out for a while now, and I do not believe the judge is doing it by the goodness of his heart, there are petitions etc on this and it is getting a lot more press time, LAWS must be followed, on how prisoners are kept, and why, even by the St Johns crappy system.

The lawsuit following this, if the boy is exonerated will be HUGE!

You are correct in that laws must be followed, and although I'm not second guessing the judge, what other case has granted furloughs to someone accused of murder? Strange.

There will be a lawsuit, for sure, no matter the verdict. Remember the not guilty verdict in the OJ case? Anyone can sue, despite the verdict, and in this case, I'm sure the Romans will do so. IMO this is why Tanya lawyered up.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

His "opinion" on the matter means nothing, so what? It is not a legal opinion, it is not a professional opinion. In as much as any of us could go in front of the camera and give our opinion on the matter, I give it no merit.

The boy should have been out for a while now, and I do not believe the judge is doing it by the goodness of his heart, there are petitions etc on this and it is getting a lot more press time, LAWS must be followed, on how prisoners are kept, and why, even by the St Johns crappy system.

The lawsuit following this, if the boy is exonerated will be HUGE!

Freedom of speech will never mean, "nothing." It doesn't matter if it isn't a legal opinion, it doesn't have to be to still carry weight. I find Big John very truthful and yes, he does have a right to voice it and if the victims are never given any semblance of justice, after being brutally murdered, we will hear more of it imo.

A Judge does not base his decisions on petitions. One of the petitions I have seen has less than a 100 people signing it and it has been out for over a week.

From what I have read the new detention center in St. John is only housing a couple of dozen or less juveniles. I would say though that they have never had to house a juvenile accused of double homicide and I hope they never have to encounter that again. This tiny rural town does not have murders and it has shattered the entire community.

To be exonerated in a civil case would mean that it be proven by his lawyers that he did not do this. If that remotely was the case and there is evidence exonerating him then Judge Roca would have held a special meeting in the criminal case and the boy's own attorney would put in a motion to dismiss the case. That has not happened. Even Wood said that he still had a client that is charged with double homicide.

It is true that this boy may never pay one bit of punishment for these crimes and the victims will be denied justice just because of their killer's age. While that is legal, I do not think it will sit well with those who mourn both of these men's death and they have every right in the world to be infuriated if this happens and voice their dismay.

imoo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

The man who spoke is a spokes person for Tim's family. They do have the right to give an opinion about how they feel about the boy getting a week out of Juvy. Evident ally they feel that the boy is the shooter.

If the evidence all points to the boy why should he get away without any consequences at all? If the evidence proves that this boy planned to murder his dad and Tim then that is pretty scary I think and especially at that young age. And if the murders were over the boy not bringing his homework home like he was told to do and he got disciplined for it then that is scary too. Maybe the boy didn't think he should get swats when he didn't do what dad told him to do but it shouldn't be something that a kid murders their parent and a friend over. Now days kids are killing their parents over anything that they believe or imagine is wrong or because they want something or for any pitiful reason. It's pretty scary. Kids that are killing are getting younger and younger every day.

I agree and what I find very telling is no one in the Romero family is speaking out in support of this boy.

It is a scary precedence being set here in this case. What it really boils down to is the age of a victim's killer can define whether justice is either denied or given. It isn't about justice imo, it is like a case that is resolved due to a technicality of being age incompetent to understand a court proceeding. IMO there will be nothing in the experts' findings that this boy suffers from some type of mental illness.

I was just reading an article where three 8 and 9 year old boys from Georgia raped a 11 year old. It is frightening the amount of violence being done by some of our young people.

imoo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

From what I remember Tim was suspected of selling drugs at one time but it was never proven and he was never charged. So...maybe he was and maybe he wasn't...who knows. It's unfair to accuse someone of something that even the LE couldn't prove one way or another. For all we know that might have been in the 90's too.

Maybe Tim hung out at the bars for a few hours each night in order to give the family he was staying with their privacy and time to be together without a house guest there all of the time. Remember...the couple had only been married since September. Still newlyweds. Just because a guy hangs out at a bar doesn't make him a drunk. We have no idea if he drank one beer or 12.
Some people hang out at a favorite bar for the company. I don't know about Tim planning on divorcing his wife for some other gal. Maybe he was or maybe some gal had her eye on him and thought he was going to.

You are so right Bobbi and that is the first thing I thought of... I think Tim tried to make himself scarce to give the new family more time for themselves.

It is sad that so much is assumed about a person when the person is no longer here to give their side of the story.

I don't think Tim was planning to divorce Tanya at all. He was just blustering because he knew Tanya was 170 miles away from him. He could tell the ladies anything he wanted. He wouldn't be the first man or woman having an affair when they are far away from their spouses.

Tiffany said Tim never came home drunk. I think he went to the bar as a way to socialize and give the Romero family their time and one thing led to another and he hooked up with Candy, I think that is her name.

I am in complete agreement with your sentence that I have bolded.

imoo

 

[Fairy1]

You are so right Bobbi and that is the first thing I thought of... I think Tim tried to make himself scarce to give the new family more time for themselves.

It is sad that so much is assumed about a person when the person is no longer here to give their side of the story.

I don't think Tim was planning to divorce Tanya at all. He was just blustering because he knew Tanya was 170 miles away from him. He could tell the ladies anything he wanted. He wouldn't be the first man or woman having an affair when they are far away from their spouses.

Tiffany said Tim never came home drunk. I think he went to the bar as a way to socialize and give the Romero family their time and one thing led to another and he hooked up with Candy, I think that is her name.

I am in complete agreement with your sentence that I have bolded.

imoo

Well yes it is, indeed, unfair for someone to be accused of something that LE cannot prove. We do not know if LE can PROVE this child killed these men, so let's apply that opinion fairly across the board. And let's not presume to know why Tim went to the bar every night or why he may have been cheating on his wife or what he may have been doing for extra income on the side. It's not an attempt to slander whatever character he's no longer here to defend. It's simply to show that it is possible there may have been others who wanted to end his life. Someone who had more of a beef than that they forgot to bring their homework home or got a couple of swats.

And BTW, alleged criminals - even murderers - get out on bail all the time. The fact that a young child should be "furloughed" is no cause for outrage or alarm. IMO.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Well yes it is, indeed, unfair for someone to be accused of something that LE cannot prove. We do not know if LE can PROVE this child killed these men, so let's apply that opinion fairly across the board. And let's not presume to know why Tim went to the bar every night or why he may have been cheating on his wife or what he may have been doing for extra income on the side. It's not an attempt to slander whatever character he's no longer here to defend. It's simply to show that it is possible there may have been others who wanted to end his life. Someone who had more of a beef than that they forgot to bring their homework home or got a couple of swats.

And BTW, alleged criminals - even murderers - get out on bail all the time. The fact that a young child should be "furloughed" is no cause for outrage or alarm. IMO.

I really don't think that is a fair comparison, Fairy. Tim Romans was never even charged or arrested for being a drug dealer. As far as I am aware once convicted for using drugs way back in the 90s he has never been arrested for anything else. So there is nothing to support that LE had any evidence to even get probable cause on Tim, much less convict him. This boy has been arrested and charged with double homicide so the DA does think they have the evidence against him. The Judge in the boy's case said probable cause had been met.

Two entirely different things imo.

I am not outraged that he is out and about, although I certainly do understand the pain and anger of the family members who have had to endure this. I am sure they would love for their murdered loved ones to have a furlough so that they can be with them and hug them close again.

We have seen many cases here when a defendant was out on bail and how hard it was for the victim's family members to deal with that , while knowing, that they will never get time to spend with their loved ones ever again.

So, yes, I do perfectly understand why they are outraged. I think any grieving family member, would be.

imo

 

[chiperoni]

I really don't think that is a fair comparison, Fairy. Tim Romans was never even charged or arrested for being a drug dealer. As far as I am aware once convicted for using drugs way back in the 90s he has never been arrested for anything else. So there is nothing to support that LE had any evidence to even get probable cause on Tim, much less convict him. This boy has been arrested and charged with double homicide so the DA does think they have the evidence against him. The Judge in the boy's case said probable cause had been met.

Two entirely different things imo.

I am not outraged that he is out and about, although I certainly do understand the pain and anger of the family members who have had to endure this. I am sure they would love for their murdered loved ones to have a furlough so that they can be with them and hug them close again.

We have seen many cases here when a defendant was out on bail and how hard it was for the victim's family members to deal with that , while knowing, that they will never get time to spend with their loved ones ever again.

So, yes, I do perfectly understand why they are outraged. I think any grieving family member, would be.

imo[/QUOTE Arresting an eight eight year old boy as a murderer (btw no history of violence) and using a botched confession is much worse than being accused of being a drug dealer. It was printed in the local newspaper that Tim was a known drug dealer in the area which is hearsay, but I don't see any public outrage or slander suits from the family or community. Tim had been living on the reservation under Apache law. If you have a link to show that the Apache LE shared any records concerning Tim please indicate. I want the victims' family to discover the truth too but not on the back of an eight year old child. At the very least, if the accused is guilty, we should know all the circumstances. We need to wait and hopefully we'll get the truth. I hope there isn't a coverup.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Lots of defendants have had no history of criminal violence before the ultimate act of homicide and they are way older than this boy.

Actually Judge Roca did not even consider the confession in the probable cause hearing. When the DA tried to enter it Judge Roca didn't allow them to enter it and told them to give the DVD to the defense attorney instead.

We have no idea what Tanya's civil attorney will encompass in his lawsuit.

I don't think the family members want to place this on the back of this child but if that is where the truth lays, then the truth is truth, no matter who's back it rests on.

I find it extremely far fetched that this is a conspiracy or a cover up. Any DA in this country would rather have an older brute for a defendant. They would go for the death penalty and probably get it if it were an adult. Now they struggle to even get some semblance of justice for these two men due to the age of the defendant.

The media prints many erroneous things. For example, when Laci was killed the first thing out by the media was, there was blood and vomit on Laci's mop and Howard Stern murdered Daniel Smith and Anna Nicole. Totally untrue. I see everyday where misinformation is put out. Even Nancy Grace does it often and never retracts it either.

imoo

 

[chiperoni]

Yes the media does print many things from unreliable sources but usually there is public outrage, letters to the editor, or slander suits if it is incorrect. This was in a local paper. The Laci Peterson description was corrected in the newspaper when the evidence was presented. We need to wait to hear all the evidence in this case. We do not know yet what happened. We certainly do not know all the extenuating circumstances. We have to wait and see.

 

[fran]

Yes the media does print many things from unreliable sources but usually there is public outrage, letters to the editor, or slander suits if it is incorrect. This was in a local paper. The Laci Peterson description was corrected in the newspaper when the evidence was presented. We need to wait to hear all the evidence in this case. We do not know yet what happened. We certainly do not know all the extenuating circumstances. We have to wait and see.

FINALLY! A voice of reason! "We do not know yet what happened. We certainly do not know all the extenuating circumstances. We have to wait and see"Thank you chiperoni!

No Ballistics, NOT complete finger-print evidence, NO dna report, missing weapons, drug addict relatives, bumbled investigation, widow NOT acting like a 'recent' widowed person, lawyered up spouces refusing to talk to LE, coerced confessions, bad blood between victims and various persons, cheating husband, psycho b/f of ONE of cheating husband's 'other' women, random gunshot holes in victim's vehicle by drug addict cousin, lack of LE to look for get-away car, lack of investigation (that WE know of), yet..................there are those that just know the child is guilty.:waitasec:

Where is the EVIDENCE?

JMHO
fran

PS..........Wonder why grandpa LeRoy found it necessary to meet Big John (Roman family spokesman) hours away from home? Wonder what was sooooo secret it couldn't have been said by phone and they had to meet so far away?:deal:

Oh, yeah, just a coinky-dink, I'm sure. fran

 

[Openmind]

FINALLY! A voice of reason! "We do not know yet what happened. We certainly do not know all the extenuating circumstances. We have to wait and see"Thank you chiperoni!

No Ballistics, NOT complete finger-print evidence, NO dna report, missing weapons, drug addict relatives, bumbled investigation, widow NOT acting like a 'recent' widowed person, lawyered up spouces refusing to talk to LE, coerced confessions, bad blood between victims and various persons, cheating husband, psycho b/f of ONE of cheating husband's 'other' women, random gunshot holes in victim's vehicle by drug addict cousin, lack of LE to look for get-away car, lack of investigation (that WE know of), yet..................there are those that just know the child is guilty.:waitasec:

Where is the EVIDENCE?

JMHO
fran

PS..........Wonder why grandpa LeRoy found it necessary to meet Big John (Roman family spokesman) hours away from home? Wonder what was sooooo secret it couldn't have been said by phone and they had to meet so far away?:deal:

Oh, yeah, just a coinky-dink, I'm sure. fran

Totally agree.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

FINALLY! A voice of reason! "We do not know yet what happened. We certainly do not know all the extenuating circumstances. We have to wait and see"Thank you chiperoni!

No Ballistics, NOT complete finger-print evidence, NO dna report, missing weapons, drug addict relatives, bumbled investigation, widow NOT acting like a 'recent' widowed person, lawyered up spouces refusing to talk to LE, coerced confessions, bad blood between victims and various persons, cheating husband, psycho b/f of ONE of cheating husband's 'other' women, random gunshot holes in victim's vehicle by drug addict cousin, lack of LE to look for get-away car, lack of investigation (that WE know of), yet..................there are those that just know the child is guilty.:waitasec:

Where is the EVIDENCE?

JMHO
fran

PS..........Wonder why grandpa LeRoy found it necessary to meet Big John (Roman family spokesman) hours away from home? Wonder what was sooooo secret it couldn't have been said by phone and they had to meet so far away?:deal:

Oh, yeah, just a coinky-dink, I'm sure. fran

The evidence is within the well of the court.

Where are all of Wood's motions demanding more diwcovery now? It is February. The evidence was all to be back by the end of January.
Where is Wood's motion to dismiss? That is common practice for attorneys especially if they think the State doesn't have the evidence against their client?

I would think these men have a lot to talk about and since the media seems to keep up with Big John when he is around, I highly doubt they would want to have their heartfelt conversation in St. John or San Carlos. Maybe they were discussing the best way to support the families who are grieving and continuing to be in emotional pain. Maybe they are just two men tied by a bond their never wanted to have? Both of them losing someone they loved because of murder.

imoo

 

[fran]

The evidence is within the well of the court.

Where are all of Wood's motions demanding more diwcovery now? It is February. The evidence was all to be back by the end of January.
Where is Wood's motion to dismiss? That is common practice for attorneys especially if they think the State doesn't have the evidence against their client?

I would think these men have a lot to talk about and since the media seems to keep up with Big John when he is around, I highly doubt they would want to have their heartfelt conversation in St. John or San Carlos. Maybe they were discussing the best way to support the families who are grieving and continuing to be in emotional pain. Maybe they are just two men tied by a bond their never wanted to have? Both of them losing someone they loved because of murder.

imoo

The recent court proceeding was held in chambers. We don't know that the evidence is back. In previous open court proceedings, the pros said they'd TRY to have the evidence back by the end of the month. Because of the length of time it CAN take to have 'evidence' examined at labs, the judge allowed the pros the possibility that they MIGHT NOT have the tests results in time for the recent hearing. Because we aren't privy to what was discussed in the recent in chambers hearing, it's POSSIBLE the evidence is still being tested.

IMHO, it may be because the alleged 'evidence' isn't back yet that the judge decided to temporarily release the child while the pros get's their ducks in a row.

FWIW, I read that the 'ballistics' was being submitted to a second lab. THAT in itself leads one to wonder just WHAT? is being discovered.

I'm still amazed that so many believe this child is guilty with so many questions still open on this case. With NO evidence, IMHO, it's kind of difficult to determine the accused's guilt........... or INNOCENCE.

Just FWIW, because items have been submitted for testing, does NOT necessarily mean it will come back pointing to the child. One will ONLY know the results, AFTER the testing is complete. Curious that LE found the boy's finger prints on the box of shells, yet we have NOT heard IF his finger prints were on the alleged murder weapon or any of the shells............OH, wait! That would work AGAINST the pros,.................pretty obvious why SOME evidence is LEAKED by the pros and SOME is held back.

The child's attorney said he wants to EXONERATE this boy. I believe he'll be able to do it. Time will tell.


SOME may not find it curious that these two victim family members met hours away from home, but I'm willing to bet any LEGITIMATE investigator would want to know just what was so important that needed to be discussed between these two parties, out of the eyes of LE or the media. Why not just a phone call?

I understand LeRoy told Big John that Tim wasn't really cheating on his wife. Curious as to the 'motive' for LeRoy to lie to Tim's family like that. Especially since everyone in town knew the score on Tim and his wild ways.

JMHO
fran