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

[oceanblueeyes]

I am doing nothing more than you are, Fran. These time lines have been documented in various motions and hearings on the Apache court site. I do think they will be accurate. I don't see me having my own opinon as any different than someone assuming that Tanya is somehow a liar or the culprit in this case. There certainly is no proof of that either.

What may have been determined as missing on November 5th, 2008 may not have been missing at all. One of the guns belonged to Vinnie's father. So he very well may have come to his son's home to retrieve his weapon before any of this ever happened. We also do not know that Tim's gun is missing. He too could have given it to someone, even his St. Johns girlfriend or left it with his wife for protection since he wasn't home during the week.

Yes, a semi automatic or automatic would fire very rapidly. However that is inconsistent with the neighbor's statement. They said they heard a "pop" then a delay between each shot. That is consistent with a single bolt action rifle.

I do not know the children that you have seen or understand why they would struggle shooting this very simple weapon. I can only go by my own personal experiences of shooting this same type of single bolt action rifle, beginning at the age of 7. I was certainly not some phenomenon, many children my age could ace a target with this gun and load,fire, eject and reload in just a few seconds.

No matter Judge Roca's rulings or not, I do not think he would keep this boy if he didn't think there is evidence against him and he knows the evidence much more in depth than anyone of us here does.

imo

 

[Trino]

If anything, I believe it will have a positive effect on this particular case. Clearly, the failure by LE to Mirandaize the child and advise him he had a right to an attorney, was MISCONDUCT by the officers.

JMHO
fran

.....from the above link................

"Some courts have ruled that as a deterrent to police misconduct, the fruits of a similar search may be excluded from evidence."

I think it will impact the warrant issued by the judge who knew the boy. The judge issued the warrant in good faith.

 

[fran]

I think it will impact the warrant issued by the judge who knew the boy. The judge issued the warrant in good faith.

Oh, I didn't connect this to the SW issue.
Well, although the judge did act in good faith, at the same time he knew he was going against the 'established rules.' That's why he MENTIONED at the time he signed the SW, that he wouldn't be able to handle the case in the future.

I HOPE they are able to keep the evidence gathered at the scene right after the murders,..........INCOMPLETE as it is.

Too bad the chief had the mortuary come and remove the bodies before the lead detectives could investigate the scene and BEFORE the forensics guys came from out of town. But then, .......the Lead Detectives feel the same way. Wonder what the judge thinks?

Poor police work, IMO.

JMHO
fran

 

[Fairy1]

I just want to clarify my position concerning Tanya. It's not that I don't consider her to be credible. I simply believe that she could easily be mistaken about what she heard and I believe it's possible Tim may have been mistaken as well. There's a huge difference between an eyewitness and an "ear" witness. The cell phone records will surely help to establish a timeline, but I don't believe any testimony of the phone conversation could be used to corroborate anything else. That's all.

With the gag order in place, we're pretty much relegated to speculation here. But let's please not overlook the fact that LE everywhere has been known to make mistakes they were not willing to admit. This LE is from a very small community that is not accustomed to investigating this type of crime. We know mistakes have been made in this case. Couple that with the fact that it's way outside of the norm and it's really not so difficult to believe that this child did not commit these murders.....

 

[MeoW333]

Hi Meo!

I don't know of any hunter that takes a puppy with them with they hunt game. Puppies are unpredictable and playful. It is not logical to take them because if they were to see a rabbit or other game they would scamper off trying to chase it.

People do take dogs with them when they have been trained to not flinch when they hear gunfire but not 4-5 month old puppies who are curious about everything. Now they may have thought once the dog got older and less unruly that she may make a good hunting dog one day. I have never heard of Boxers being hunting dogs though.

imoo

Hi OBE, Mornin'
I'm sure the boy wasn't doing a serious game hunting without his father. If the boy went to target shoot at cans, he could have brought the puppy with him. We don't know either way, is true..
Boxers may make good hunting dogs if they were to be trained right.
I just read an article in the "News that makes you smile" about an Officer who adopted a pound puppy and trained him for police work, since their department didn't have the funds for a K9. It was originally the boy's boxer, so it's anyone's guess if the boy took him around with him a lot.
Too bad the boxer can't tell us what happened.

 

[SailorMoon]

Well......fwiw at this point... I still have a lot of sympathy and feel bad for the child. I cannot imagine my 7yo doing something like this...even remotely close. Yes, I know the "accused" is 8yo and things have been done that no one could ever imagine...but LE didn't help with their questioning methods in this case. think of your child in that interrogation room with LE.....I'm almost inclined to think that they could have made my son say he ate the moon. Leaves a lot of wondering and what ifs to me.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Hi OBE, Mornin'
I'm sure the boy wasn't doing a serious game hunting without his father. If the boy went to target shoot at cans, he could have brought the puppy with him. We don't know either way, is true..
Boxers may make good hunting dogs if they were to be trained right.
I just read an article in the "News that makes you smile" about an Officer who adopted a pound puppy and trained him for police work, since their department didn't have the funds for a K9. It was originally the boy's boxer, so it's anyone's guess if the boy took him around with him a lot.
Too bad the boxer can't tell us what happened.

Hi there!

I do agree that she may have been able to be trained later. Are Boxers used for hunting dogs though? I am curious because I have never heard of them being used as a hunting dog. They can be a little rambunctious.

I know one time my dad and I went target practicing and he took our little fox terrier, Patsy, with us. We didn't even think about the gunfire and how she would react. When we got ready to come home we couldn't find her anywhere. We looked for three days, day and night, and then she finally made it home on her own from three miles away where she went missing. After then we even noticed she was terrified of even fireworks or thunder and lightning.

It doesn't have to be serious hunting, It is the firing of the weapon and most, if not trained, will head for the hills scared to death. High pitches hurts a dog's ears and Nellie is just a puppy.

I may be wrong but I just don't think they took her hunting but she was his puppy and he played with her in the home and around the neighborhood.

I think Nellie was scared to death the day all the gunfire erupted but she had no where to hide, since she was supposedly in her cage.

imoo

 

[OrdinaryLife]

This could be a repeat news post, but I didn't see it anywhere here.

Judge ruled child can see a therapist on January 15th. Next Court date is set for January 29th.

www.edmontonsun.com/News/World/2009/01/15/8029496-sun.html

Brief update.

 

[Oklahoma Mike]

I have had strong opinions regarding this case since the beginning but didn't think it worth voiceing but what the hey. . .
The main thing that bothers me, and all I know are from news reports, is LE from the beginning seem determined that this LITTLE BOY is a master criminal. The Joker, or Doc Oc come to life. Bringing him into court in ankle chains was so unnecessary and over the top. I mean, what's the kid gonna' do? Overpower the baliif with his kung fu moves, dive out the window into the front seat of his Aston-Martin and drive to his underground base full of atomic weapons? This is a LITTLE KID!
I am not argueing for his innocence or guilt because I don't know. If he did kill 2 people he should NOT just walk out. He needs to be either treated and/or punished if found gulilty. Maybe he is an 8-y.o. boy who has committed murder. but he is STILL an 8-y.o. boy and even the early talk (since died away)of trying him as an adult was riciculous and would never fly. Try him under juvenile laws and if convicted apply the punishment the law calls for. Maybe someday he will be as dangerous as Hannibil Lecter, but for now he's not.

 

[mysteriew]

I personally don't have the same confidence in the reliability of Tanya's statement and I don't believe LE or a judge will either. After watching case after case unfold here on the pages of Websleuth's and in the media, I view anything she says as a witness in this case as, tainted.

The first report to LE was, that I saw, "Tim told her the boy was calling him." It wasn't until later, the next day I believe, that she claimed to have heard the child's voice. But, by the time the revelation came out that she'd actually heard the child's voice, she already had a ve$ted interest in WANTING the child to be the shooter.

In Tanya's earliest phone interviews about the crime, she made claims that her husband was the 'only bread winner' of the family. By the time she met with the family of the other victim, she already had it in her sites to sue the game manufacturers. "What video games does he play?" She also stopped in the middle of her interview with LE, when they inquired about Tim's OTHER women. She then lawyered up and refused subsequent requests by LE to talk to her, 'Talk to my lawyer.' She wouldn't even give them Tim's cell phone number.

Grieving wife won't talk to LE but referred them to her lawyer. MAJOR RED FLAG.

Oh, I'm not sure she had anything to do with the actual murders. But, she does plan to profit off them. However, the only way she can profit off her husband's death is IF the child is declared the killer.

The time line means NOTHING. It just proves what time the killings happened. It does NOT prove who the shooter was. Just like the GSR doesn't prove anything except that the child was at the scene of the crime, which he admitted he stumbled onto.

JMHO
fran

PS......points to ponder............from child's interview...........'does anyone come over while you're home alone?' ' No, just grandpa sometimes.' or '....a white car 'like grandpa's.'' Further along in questioning he mentioned another 22 LR in the home, '.......grandpa's, it's the same but bigger and takes the same ammo.'...........NOT EXACT quotes but close. Owner's manual to 22LR, Mossberg, automatic, empty gun case, pictured in evidence photos. Where's the gun? ...fran

PPS....Two guns kept in Tim's truck, only one found by LE. Where's the second gun? Why was the passenger side door open? Did someone stop to retreive a gun from behind the seat? LE found the second gun in the console. Dana said Tim kept his gun behind the seat..........fran

PPPS....I viewed on youtube people shooting the same gun as the alleged murder weapon. Not only is it clumsy even when the shooter has it propped up in front of them trying to load it quickly, it makes barely a pop. This COULD account for someone outside not hearing shots fired inside a closed house. But it ALSO bodes towards the neighbor NOT being able to hear the discharge as well, even WITH the front door open. IMHO, IF the neighbors heard Tim being shot, it was not the Cricket gun (or whatever) they heard discharged. It was MOST LIKELY the Mossberg, that takes the same shells as the boy's gun and is MISSING.fran

PPPPS...............Wonder how Tim's wife was able to make out the child's voice above the DOG BARK?!..............OR, IF she didn't hear the dog barking, she didn't hear the boy either.........fran

The wife lawyered up???? She refused to give them his phone number???? (though if he was on the phone to her at the time of the shooting, the phone should have been at the scene and therefore now in their possession)

Come on! Someone shoots and kills your husband, and when LE starts asking hard questions instead of demanding justice you lawyer up???? Definately something wrong here.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

The wife lawyered up???? She refused to give them his phone number???? (though if he was on the phone to her at the time of the shooting, the phone should have been at the scene and therefore now in their possession)

Come on! Someone shoots and kills your husband, and when LE starts asking hard questions instead of demanding justice you lawyer up???? Definitely something wrong here.

The only lawyer I know that Tanya got is a civil lawyer.

Seems she is going to sue and thinks violent video games may have come into play somewhere.

imo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I have had strong opinions regarding this case since the beginning but didn't think it worth voiceing but what the hey. . .
The main thing that bothers me, and all I know are from news reports, is LE from the beginning seem determined that this LITTLE BOY is a master criminal. The Joker, or Doc Oc come to life. Bringing him into court in ankle chains was so unnecessary and over the top. I mean, what's the kid gonna' do? Overpower the baliif with his kung fu moves, dive out the window into the front seat of his Aston-Martin and drive to his underground base full of atomic weapons? This is a LITTLE KID!
I am not argueing for his innocence or guilt because I don't know. If he did kill 2 people he should NOT just walk out. He needs to be either treated and/or punished if found guilty. Maybe he is an 8-y.o. boy who has committed murder. but he is STILL an 8-y.o. boy and even the early talk (since died away)of trying him as an adult was ridiculous and would never fly. Try him under juvenile laws and if convicted apply the punishment the law calls for. Maybe someday he will be as dangerous as Hannibil Lecter, but for now he's not.

I don't think he was a master criminal at all and he didn't have to be. No master criminal shoots 10 times when killing two unarmed men. Shooting two unsuspecting men who had no clue or warning this was going to happen to them is like picking off ducks sitting on a pond. All of this happened when the shooter was within feet of them. 24 feet at the furtherest and closer with the other shots. It takes no skill or expertise to bring down anyone who does not have a way to protect themselves. If Tim had run back toward the truck he would have been shot in the back or the head. He was trapped. I think that Tim didn't exactly know where the gunfire was coming from. He may have thought that it was from the vicinity of the doorway and the only thing he could do was try to come up on the left side of the house hoping to flatten his body up against the home and out of the line of gunfire but the gunman was waiting for him on the porch using the ivy bushes as a blind imo.

I am sure the rules of the court must pertain to all defendants no matter their age. If it were not the rule then Judge Roca, who is sitting right there would have him brought in without shackles and handcuffs. He is not the typical juvenile defendant anyway. He is charged with two premeditated homicides. The court has courtroom rules concerning how defendants are to be brought in and they enforce those rules, no matter who the defendant happens to be or what age.


imoo

 

[Bobbisangel]

The evidence in this case is going to tell the tale in my opinion. I don't for a second believe that LE was out to get this 8 yr old boy. That would be just insane. It seems that there was enough evidence that pointed to him or something pointed to him anyway. Most of those officers probably have kids or grandkids and it probably wasn't one bit fun taking this little boy to the police station. We can all have our opinions but in the end it will be the evidence that will determine whether this little boy committed two murders or not.

 

[azmama]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081230/...PskovUDB5G2ocA

The now 9-year-old boy was found incompetent to stand trial. This is only the expert hired for the defense. I don't think we have learned what the State's expert evaluated.

If he agrees with the defense then there will be no problem but what if he doesn't agree and one says, yes, and then other says, no, what happens then?


http://ktar.com/?nid=6&sid=1019177

Gunshot Residue Found on Boy's Clothing.

Confession of AZ boy accused in double murder won't be used

http://www.abc15.com/content/news/no...yxRXrvMJg.cspx

In court documents released this morning, prosecutors agreed not to use the statements unless the boy takes the stand in his own defense and contradicts them.

Prosecutors said their decision doesn't mean they agree the statements were illegally obtained.


Here's a petition for little Child Romero's release into his mother's custody and/or other family members deemed responsible by the DA and the boy's Guardian Ad Litem.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/hel...d-child-romero

I thought there was new news, but we have discussed all of these topics at great length.... with the exception of the petition.

Three of your links are broken, I couldn't find the petition on the site you showed, the link for that is one of the broken ones.

I haven't seen any new news out of St. John! I keep checking back here.....

 

[MeoW333]

I have had strong opinions regarding this case since the beginning but didn't think it worth voiceing but what the hey. . .
The main thing that bothers me, and all I know are from news reports, is LE from the beginning seem determined that this LITTLE BOY is a master criminal. The Joker, or Doc Oc come to life. Bringing him into court in ankle chains was so unnecessary and over the top. I mean, what's the kid gonna' do? Overpower the baliif with his kung fu moves, dive out the window into the front seat of his Aston-Martin and drive to his underground base full of atomic weapons? This is a LITTLE KID!
I am not argueing for his innocence or guilt because I don't know. If he did kill 2 people he should NOT just walk out. He needs to be either treated and/or punished if found gulilty. Maybe he is an 8-y.o. boy who has committed murder. but he is STILL an 8-y.o. boy and even the early talk (since died away)of trying him as an adult was riciculous and would never fly. Try him under juvenile laws and if convicted apply the punishment the law calls for. Maybe someday he will be as dangerous as Hannibil Lecter, but for now he's not.

Welcome to Websleuths, Oklahoma Mike!
I agree with what you are saying; i believe at one point an article mentioned that the boy's defense attorney, Brewer asked if the shackles could be removed. I agree that an 8 year old boy in the presence of Sheriff's deputies and security is not a threat. If he was a threat, we would have heard stories of him acting out in the courtroom or attacking psychologists or others while incarcerated. Even though theres a gag order, those types of things would have leaked out.
They're just following procedure, yet i know of someplaces that just bring adults to court in handcuffs attached to waist chains, no ankle shackles. It probably varies by what area one is from.
I'm waiting on more information from this case, too.

 

[Fairy1]

Welcome to Websleuths, Oklahoma Mike!
I agree with what you are saying; i believe at one point an article mentioned that the boy's defense attorney, Brewer asked if the shackles could be removed. I agree that an 8 year old boy in the presence of Sheriff's deputies and security is not a threat. If he was a threat, we would have heard stories of him acting out in the courtroom or attacking psychologists or others while incarcerated. Even though theres a gag order, those types of things would have leaked out.
They're just following procedure, yet i know of someplaces that just bring adults to court in handcuffs attached to waist chains, no ankle shackles. It probably varies by what area one is from.
I'm waiting on more information from this case, too.

We definitely do need more info. But seriously, shackles on an 8-year-old? They have no idea how to handle this case.

 

[azmama]

Hmmmmm I will have to talk to my Mom, she took in a teen age girl, a runaway friend of my sisters years after I moved out, she was in and out of juvie, I will ask if she was shackled.

I guess it would just be guess work either way, she did not murder anyone, just a pain in the butt, run away teenager! Couldn't keep her life together....

 

[PigTails]

Use of Restraints Contract guards and secure facilities under contract with the INS or that have signed interagency agreements with the INS, as a regular course of action, restrain the INS's unaccompanied non-delinquent juveniles during transport. All four of the secure facilities we visited had written policy that allowed staff to handcuff, and in some cases, shackle all juveniles, including the INS's unaccompanied juveniles, during transport. For example, the Gila County Youth Detention Center, a contract detention facility in Arizona, has a standing policy that all juveniles, including INS detainees, will be handcuffed and shackled during transport.

http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/INS/e0109/chapter2.htm

 

[oceanblueeyes]

http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/INS/e0109/chapter2.htm

Thank you, PigTails

I knew this was a customary procedure that applies to all.

They will not make any allowances for one and not the other.

 

[azmama]

Well, I can accept LE and the courts abiding by the regulations, if they were to follow ALL of the rules and regs, and since day one, they have made many exceptions, we all believe that (I think), or am I wrong on this point?

They should be following ALL of the regulations, including those tossed aside in the investigation, questioning, searching, judicial decisions and the ones that are being broken in holding this boy right this very minute, if that is not pick and choose, I don't know what is!
We are now waaaaaay past the 45 day limit of holding this child!

Are the breaking of all of those NOT making an exception?
They are all the laws here in AZ....They should not be able to pick and choose which they follow, and they are. The continual pick and choose they are doing about all of these is going to add to the likelyhood of it all being thrown out, buy hey, why not?
It was all bungled since the beginning, why "make an exception" and try to adhere to all of the rules now?

There is really no excuse for this.

That all said, IF this boy is guilty, which I begrudging admit that he MAY be (but do not believe he is), he will walk, because of LE and now the courts shoddy work! On the other side of the coin, IF he is innocent, there is very real damage being done to his psyshe now, right? Is all of this ok with everyone? LE in general not following it's own code.....Now THAT is a travesty!

**sorry if my thoughts are redundant.....**