Wow. Powerful post! I have tried to explain this about the developing brain and frontal lobes in connection with this case but many simply see to glide right past that truth for a more salacious view that this child is a bad seed - a little, budding sociopath. I can't write off a child that age so easily. Thanks for your input.
AZ - Timothy Romans, 39, & Vincent Romero, 29, slain, St Johns, 5 Nov 2008 - #4
- Thread starter Salem
- Start date
- Status
Wow. Powerful post! I have tried to explain this about the developing brain and frontal lobes in connection with this case but many simply see to glide right past that truth for a more salacious view that this child is a bad seed - a little, budding sociopath. I can't write off a child that age so easily. Thanks for your input.
Bobbisangel
New Member
- Joined
- May 6, 2004
- Messages
- 11,071
- Reaction score
- 233
It seems to me that the defense attorney said that he wanted to wait until the evidence came back from the lab before he decided on a plea deal. I don't think an attorney would agree to a plea deal unless there was proof that his client is guilty no matter how old the client is.
I wonder if all of the evidence is back from the lab yet? If the defense attorney starts talking plea deal with the Pros I think we will know that this boy is guilty. Can't hardly argue with evidence...DNA, etc.
Originally Posted by shadowraiths
My contention regarding this case is that I absolutely and completely disagree with the view point that this child premeditated and executed the murders in a cold and calculating way.
For one, this view point is simply impossible due to physiological limitations—the frontal cortex, which, among other things, regulate abstract thought and impulse control, is not even remotely fully developed. Furthermore, and dep upon his developmental trajectory he is either still in, or recently emerging from the ME stage. This stage, btw, in an adult, is considered to be "sociopathic." Yet it is not only expected, but quite normal in young children as they move along the developmental path towards socialization. And as much as some may not like the idea, socialization, in and of itself, is a process, not an innate way of being. And finally, he does not have enough experiential (social, emotional, or otherwise) development to fully appreciate the gravity of his actions.
That being said, afaics, this is an extremely tragic case, for both the victims and this child. While it is easy paint this little boy from our adult world view, and then castigate him. And even be rather gleeful with the idea of him being not only tried as an adult but severely punished in an adult way (an eye for an eye, no? Well, that would of course require the death penalty in this case. After all, he allegedly murdered not one, but two men).
And we wonder why our children kill...
Imo, the biggest tragedy that has yet to play out (and that may very well play out in a devastatingly violent way), is that our society, by and large, really does not give two shakes about this child—that is outside of the sensational aspect. In fact, I am of the contention that the whole, "we're gonna get him therapeutic help" is nothing more than lip service for a public that basically does not care what happens to him. That is, as long as "the kid" is put somewhere... You know, "out of sight and out of mind"? OBE's comment exemplifies this sentiment.
Sadly, I suspect this is the rule and not the exception when it comes to not only this case, but other cases that involve young children. And I admittedly find this to be the most troubling.
Wow, shadowraiths- that is very interesting and powerful, gitana- I must have missed you posting about that before, it is very interesting. Thanks for the info.
I don't know that I would believe guilt on a plea simply because everyone involved is working for the same entity, the county and state of Arizona, there are no "private" lawyers working. I would actually believe that the case is so complicated and convoluted that it is easier, less costly, and less traumatic on everyone involved if it pleads out instead of taking it to trial.
My understanding is that again, this is a plea offer from the prosecution, seems unlikely in that light that they can't prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt...or they would!
I am not saying he is not guilty, but due to the bungled handling of this case since literally a few minutes after the crime took place, they lost their chance to collect real and hard evidence. In addition to that, people have lost a huge amount of trust and respect in LE there, and for good reason, he can't get a fair trial there.
It will be interesting to see what will happen, especially since the competence hearing has never taken place. Even if he signs a deal now, it could be overturned in appeal based on the competence reviews.
My contention regarding this case is that I absolutely and completely disagree with the view point that this child premeditated and executed the murders in a cold and calculating way.
For one, this view point is simply impossible due to physiological limitations—the frontal cortex, which, among other things, regulate abstract thought and impulse control, is not even remotely fully developed. Furthermore, and dep upon his developmental trajectory he is either still in, or recently emerging from the ME stage. This stage, btw, in an adult, is considered to be "sociopathic." Yet it is not only expected, but quite normal in young children as they move along the developmental path towards socialization. And as much as some may not like the idea, socialization, in and of itself, is a process, not an innate way of being. And finally, he does not have enough experiential (social, emotional, or otherwise) development to fully appreciate the gravity of his actions.
That being said, afaics, this is an extremely tragic case, for both the victims and this child. While it is easy paint this little boy from our adult world view, and then castigate him. And even be rather gleeful with the idea of him being not only tried as an adult but severely punished in an adult way (an eye for an eye, no? Well, that would of course require the death penalty in this case. After all, he allegedly murdered not one, but two men).
And we wonder why our children kill...
Imo, the biggest tragedy that has yet to play out (and that may very well play out in a devastatingly violent way), is that our society, by and large, really does not give two shakes about this child—that is outside of the sensational aspect. In fact, I am of the contention that the whole, "we're gonna get him therapeutic help" is nothing more than lip service for a public that basically does not care what happens to him. That is, as long as "the kid" is put somewhere... You know, "out of sight and out of mind"? OBE's comment exemplifies this sentiment.
Sadly, I suspect this is the rule and not the exception when it comes to not only this case, but other cases that involve young children. And I admittedly find this to be the most troubling.
Wow, shadowraiths- that is very interesting and powerful, gitana- I must have missed you posting about that before, it is very interesting. Thanks for the info.
I don't know that I would believe guilt on a plea simply because everyone involved is working for the same entity, the county and state of Arizona, there are no "private" lawyers working. I would actually believe that the case is so complicated and convoluted that it is easier, less costly, and less traumatic on everyone involved if it pleads out instead of taking it to trial.
My understanding is that again, this is a plea offer from the prosecution, seems unlikely in that light that they can't prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt...or they would!
I am not saying he is not guilty, but due to the bungled handling of this case since literally a few minutes after the crime took place, they lost their chance to collect real and hard evidence. In addition to that, people have lost a huge amount of trust and respect in LE there, and for good reason, he can't get a fair trial there.
It will be interesting to see what will happen, especially since the competence hearing has never taken place. Even if he signs a deal now, it could be overturned in appeal based on the competence reviews.
oceanblueeyes
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2004
- Messages
- 26,446
- Reaction score
- 43,781
Most people take time off when they lose a loved one even when it is from natural causes. I am sure her employer understood she needed time away from work.
She was with family so I highly doubt she was spending a lot of money. Smiling isn't against the law after the loss of a loved one.
I don't know how much Tim made or Vinnie but I would guess that both salaries were much higher than their spouses' income.
Who said Tim didn't make much money?:waitasec: I thought Tanya said that Tim was the main breadwinner?
As far as grieving, I think that is best known by the people in St. John who has actually been around her since her stepson imo, murdered her husband.
Who wouldn't want to escape from that reality, if only for a little while.
imo
oceanblueeyes
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2004
- Messages
- 26,446
- Reaction score
- 43,781
90% of criminal cases are plead out and never make it to trial. It isn't because the DA cannot prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. If that were true then the defense attorney nor the clients would have a reason to plea but go to trial instead. Many times, imo, it is because the DA does have to evidence against the defendant and the attorneys and clients knows that.
It is cost effective for the State to plea cases out. Trials are extremely expensive and time consuming. If every case went without a plea and went to trial, our country would be even further backlogged than it is with the approximately 10% who do insist on a trial.
This boy's attorney would never suggest a plea deal to this child ,if this child is proclaiming he is innocent. Neither would the child accept or the child's custodian, standby and accept a plea if they both are proclaiming his innocence.
BUT, IMO this boy is not proclaiming he is innocent and I think he has even told others besides LE, he did it.
imoo
A snap shot only captures a second in time.
It's not hard to believe a person could crack a smile for a camera.
In my experience, friends...very close ones typically try to take your mind of the loss, if even for a few hours.
I totally agree. We also know both the defense as well as the prosecution have agreed this boy needs treatment.
SoobsinMI
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2008
- Messages
- 187
- Reaction score
- 1
I disagree. If it's conceivable that the prosecution would enter into a plea deal, to save money, why is is invonceivable that the defense would do the same? Especially if the child isn't looking at any jail time, perhaps counseling (which everyone agrees he needs), would have the crime expunged from his record when he's an adult (when it truly matters?)
Who has the boy told besides LE, that "he did it?" Do you have a link? Thanks.
fran
Former Member
I have watched the discussion on this case go back and forth and about the only solid proof anyone can come up with, that this child is guilty, is his def attorney is willing to make a plea deal, so the evidence we aren't privy to yet MUST point directly to the child. A while ago, I would have adamently agreed with this argument. But not so today. I've seen too many cases where it was later proven the person in prison, was in fact innocent.
In this day, with all of the dna evidence and such, we've gotten into the mind-set that if there's no dna proving a person is guilty or innocent, if the circumstantial evidence points to that person, he's guilty as charged. How wrong that can be.
Sure, like the Scott P case, he was convicted on circumstantial evidence alone, but it was an overwhelming amount AND NOTHING pointing to anyone else. Each case must be taken on it's own and not clumped together. In this case, no matter what anyone says, there's still too much circumstantial evidence pointing towards another that needs to be resolved, answered beyond a reasonable doubt, before I personally would dismiss it as coincidence. To ignore these facts or simply dismiss them and ASSUME we KNOW that the pros has looked at them is not fair to this child or the victims.
I asked a question the other day and received an answer by a few, that they would be able to convict this child with what they know today?Their reasoning being they assume what we haven't seen points to the child........a decision based on just a few circumstances and a LOT of rumor, innuendo, and assumptions...........THAT scares me.
Until I've seen for myself that the possibly 'exonerating evidence' has been investigated to the fullest, I'm not willing to throw this child, this defendent under the bus. That would be a miscarriage of justice to the fullest.
While studying this case, I've also looked into 'plea deals.' IF this def pleas 'no contest,' or 'nolo contendre,' they are NOT pleaing guilty, contrary to popular belief. They are actually 'acknowleging the charges' and 'acknowleging the sentence.' THAT is it. Nothing more, nothing less.
A plea deal is agreed to, on BOTH SIDES, as a remedy at a conclusion for BOTH sides because BOTH sides know that they stand to loose on what has been gathered.
The pros KNOWS the def has too much evidence pointing to SODDI and the pros has enough 'circumstantial' evidence pointing to the POSSIBILITY the child did it. As has been stated, plea deals are taken on both sides to avoid costly, timely trials and so the court can process MORE criminal cases. Our courts would be clogged for decades if they had to actually have a trial for all criminals.
What's scary is the possible number of 'innocent' people who have plead to a lessor charge so they're ensured of a 'lessor' and sometimes no jail time. The scary part is, IF they're innocent, ..........then someone got away with a crime.
JMHO
fran
In this day, with all of the dna evidence and such, we've gotten into the mind-set that if there's no dna proving a person is guilty or innocent, if the circumstantial evidence points to that person, he's guilty as charged. How wrong that can be.
Sure, like the Scott P case, he was convicted on circumstantial evidence alone, but it was an overwhelming amount AND NOTHING pointing to anyone else. Each case must be taken on it's own and not clumped together. In this case, no matter what anyone says, there's still too much circumstantial evidence pointing towards another that needs to be resolved, answered beyond a reasonable doubt, before I personally would dismiss it as coincidence. To ignore these facts or simply dismiss them and ASSUME we KNOW that the pros has looked at them is not fair to this child or the victims.
I asked a question the other day and received an answer by a few, that they would be able to convict this child with what they know today?Their reasoning being they assume what we haven't seen points to the child........a decision based on just a few circumstances and a LOT of rumor, innuendo, and assumptions...........THAT scares me.
Until I've seen for myself that the possibly 'exonerating evidence' has been investigated to the fullest, I'm not willing to throw this child, this defendent under the bus. That would be a miscarriage of justice to the fullest.
While studying this case, I've also looked into 'plea deals.' IF this def pleas 'no contest,' or 'nolo contendre,' they are NOT pleaing guilty, contrary to popular belief. They are actually 'acknowleging the charges' and 'acknowleging the sentence.' THAT is it. Nothing more, nothing less.
A plea deal is agreed to, on BOTH SIDES, as a remedy at a conclusion for BOTH sides because BOTH sides know that they stand to loose on what has been gathered.
The pros KNOWS the def has too much evidence pointing to SODDI and the pros has enough 'circumstantial' evidence pointing to the POSSIBILITY the child did it. As has been stated, plea deals are taken on both sides to avoid costly, timely trials and so the court can process MORE criminal cases. Our courts would be clogged for decades if they had to actually have a trial for all criminals.
What's scary is the possible number of 'innocent' people who have plead to a lessor charge so they're ensured of a 'lessor' and sometimes no jail time. The scary part is, IF they're innocent, ..........then someone got away with a crime.
JMHO
fran
fran
Former Member
Bolded by me.
Oh, contrare. Yes we can argue with DNA evidence. The forensic evidence is only as good as the person gathering the evidence and the forensic expert analyzing the samples.
We've already seen how s*rewed up this investigation has been, from the moment St. Johns LE arrived on the scene. Pathetic, comes to mind.
Just sayin'
fran
fran
Former Member
ITA!
IF the only 'crime' (if you will) this child committed was coming upon these two murdered men, one of them being his own father, just imagine what damage has been done to his psych.
FWIW, one of the boy's relatives said something about the night of the murders, later when the family was gathered, the child set himself away from the rest of the family....................another witness talked about how after the incident, the child layed on a day bed, would wimper, fall asleep, wimper again, fall asleep............over and over................damage to his little soul.....
JMHO
fran
PS.......these are some of the 'witness statements' that have gotten lost in the sensationalism of the rumors and innuendos put out by the pros to point to the child as the perp..........pathetic......fran
fran
Former Member
This is a prime example of how THIS CASE has been tried in the media by not only the news agency, but the pros. NOTE the supposed 'evidence' being presented.
Ear witness FWIW the child did say he called Tim, so this fits exactly into his intial story
Confession EVERY expert that's witnessed that bogus confession stated it is coerced, but yet the news and the pros keep spouting about it. What jury would forget it? BOGUS as it is.
Confession Not to forget that the child's alleged confession did NOT fit the crime.
Rumors How easy it is to make up bs AFTER someone is in jail. A person who would find guilty a suspect on rumor, has NO BUSINESS being on a jury. PERIOD.
Spanking log They're still talking about the 'spanking log' that was a figment of the child's coerced imagination kindled by two lying police officers. It's already been stated LE couldn't find any such log, although they obtained a SW based on this statement. But far be it for the newspaper to check for the accuracy of what they print.
These are just the tip of the iceberg of rumors and innuendos and just plain 'GOSSIP' that is fueling the pros and judgment of this child.
What a miscarriage of justice!
JMHO
fran
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2009/02/13/20090213stjohns0213.html
Plea deal near in St. Johns murder case
The murder case against a 9-year-old St. Johns boy accused of killing his father and another man is expected to end in a plea agreement next week, sparing the tiny rural community from a painfully spectacular homicide trial.
.......................snip.........................
However, Romans' wife told police she was on the phone with her husband just moments before the shooting and heard the defendant's voice in the background.
During a second interview, the boy told officers he did not fire the first shots wounding both victims but put them out of their misery after finding them in death throes.
Several witnesses, including classmates, said the boy had talked of killing his father.
A social worker told detectives the boy claimed to have a log of spankings and decided that 1,000 spankings would be his limit.
Despite that evidence, the prosecution also faced major hurdles in court, especially a defense claim that the boy is not competent to stand trial.
Ear witness FWIW the child did say he called Tim, so this fits exactly into his intial story
Confession EVERY expert that's witnessed that bogus confession stated it is coerced, but yet the news and the pros keep spouting about it. What jury would forget it? BOGUS as it is.
Confession Not to forget that the child's alleged confession did NOT fit the crime.
Rumors How easy it is to make up bs AFTER someone is in jail. A person who would find guilty a suspect on rumor, has NO BUSINESS being on a jury. PERIOD.
Spanking log They're still talking about the 'spanking log' that was a figment of the child's coerced imagination kindled by two lying police officers. It's already been stated LE couldn't find any such log, although they obtained a SW based on this statement. But far be it for the newspaper to check for the accuracy of what they print.
These are just the tip of the iceberg of rumors and innuendos and just plain 'GOSSIP' that is fueling the pros and judgment of this child.
What a miscarriage of justice!
JMHO
fran
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2009/02/13/20090213stjohns0213.html
Plea deal near in St. Johns murder case
The murder case against a 9-year-old St. Johns boy accused of killing his father and another man is expected to end in a plea agreement next week, sparing the tiny rural community from a painfully spectacular homicide trial.
.......................snip.........................
However, Romans' wife told police she was on the phone with her husband just moments before the shooting and heard the defendant's voice in the background.
During a second interview, the boy told officers he did not fire the first shots wounding both victims but put them out of their misery after finding them in death throes.
Several witnesses, including classmates, said the boy had talked of killing his father.
A social worker told detectives the boy claimed to have a log of spankings and decided that 1,000 spankings would be his limit.
Despite that evidence, the prosecution also faced major hurdles in court, especially a defense claim that the boy is not competent to stand trial.
OrdinaryLife
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 5,675
- Reaction score
- 36
There was a reason why I reposted the link concerning the deal offered just 3 weeks after the murders from the DA. They have nothing. And what they do have is questionable. Still is. If it were not this case would have moved on to trial or at the very least, plans for trial.
This case was never a slam dunk. The DA was handed a nightmare from the very beginning and he knows it. Whatever the plea deal is, I doubt very much that it came from the Defense.
Obviously, in my humble opinion.
This case was never a slam dunk. The DA was handed a nightmare from the very beginning and he knows it. Whatever the plea deal is, I doubt very much that it came from the Defense.
Obviously, in my humble opinion.
oceanblueeyes
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2004
- Messages
- 26,446
- Reaction score
- 43,781
It is my opinion that he has told others.
Why would the defense do the same? It doesn't cost them anything. All their expenses are paid by the State.
How do we know he isn't looking at any jail time?
This is what his own attorney said in the link below. Sure looks like they know he could spend jail time in a county detention center.
AP CLARIFICATION:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iG_nB7rdOr3TiaL5ph3YDR5qNNTAD96AUB704
imo
IMO The only reason this case was a nightmare for the prosecution was his young age.
fran
Former Member
The fact is, the def attorney said his "client could serve time in a county facility, but ``we certainly don't think'' he will. Although there is a link to this statement previously and it was a 'corrected' statement at that, still makes it wrong, because it's incomplete. The 'correct' version is linked below.
This statement would indicate in it's entirety, IMHO, that it's the def attorney's desire to have the child receive mental treatment, but NOT serve in a penal setting. Heaven only knows this child needs psychiactric treatment, IF not as the killer, but at the LEAST, for the way he's been treated since he came upon the murdered bodies of the two victims. The way he's been treated by the very people he SHOULD have been able to trust, the police and courts.
There is no guarantee the def attorney will be able to meet his desires. I guess it's up to the judge. But then, could the def then reject and request to go to trial if he doesn't like the judges decision of even a short time of juvenile detention? I dunno. I don't know if it would by then, be too late to pull his new plea to the court.
Speculation that the child may have confessed to someone else besides the bogus confession is just that, speculation. This is the same type of rumors that have been flying off the shelves of this courthouse about the child and later repeated as fact. These 'rumors' and NOT fact are what many are using as their basis of opinion the child is guilty. It serves no purpose as to the truth to the matter but merely to insight towards the alleged guilt of the accused.
If you have a link that this is in fact true, the child confessed to anyone else other than what is portrayed on the distributed video, please provide it so this can be put to rest and deciphered as 'rumor' or fact.
Repeating over and over again one's opinion of something NOT in fact, will NOT make it so. We do NOT know this child ever confessed to anyone other than the two lying police officers that betrayed him. This is how gossip begins.
The def has been at the mercy of this court, this judge from the get go. Even when he attempted to hire a doctor to work with the child, the judge whined about the hourly rate. The def even offered to pay for the difference that the State would allow. In the end, the def got the doctor to agree to treat the child at a reduced fee and it was only THEN that the court authorized the child's treatement.
The def does NOT have an open check book like the pros does. It's ludicrous at best to ASSUME that the def has at their disposal, a myriad of private detectives and such to counter the pros claims and follow up with every 'tom, dick, and harry,' that has made baseless accusations against this child. Yes, even the def attorney's fee is paid by the State in this case, but most likely at a set rate. NOT unlimited funds like the State.
The FACT is, this child and his future, is being held by the pros and this judge to do with as they will. It's now up to the def to do what's best for this child. Take a CHANCE and go to trial, with the scores of doctors, institutions and strangers picking at his brain and then to have the State hold back a charge and go over this again, in 6 years? and take a CHANCE on the possibility of life in prison.....and even IF found innocent, his entire childhood will have been ruined by an over-zealous, rush to judgment pros and years of court hearings, trials, doctors, possible incarceration while all this is going on....or plea to a lessor charge, no contest,......and get psychiactric treatment and a clear record when he is 18?
Hostage,............he most likely has no choice. Then there's the FACT that there's possibly a double murderer walking among the innocent citizens of St. Johns, Arizona. An enemy among them.
JMHO
fran
http://ktar.com/?nid=6&sid=1085114&r=1
................snip..................
Prosecutors have not commented on the plea agreement, and defense attorneys have said little other than that it would assure the boy spends no time in the state juvenile corrections system. Brewer said his client could serve time in a county facility, but ``we certainly don't think'' he will.
This statement would indicate in it's entirety, IMHO, that it's the def attorney's desire to have the child receive mental treatment, but NOT serve in a penal setting. Heaven only knows this child needs psychiactric treatment, IF not as the killer, but at the LEAST, for the way he's been treated since he came upon the murdered bodies of the two victims. The way he's been treated by the very people he SHOULD have been able to trust, the police and courts.
There is no guarantee the def attorney will be able to meet his desires. I guess it's up to the judge. But then, could the def then reject and request to go to trial if he doesn't like the judges decision of even a short time of juvenile detention? I dunno. I don't know if it would by then, be too late to pull his new plea to the court.
Speculation that the child may have confessed to someone else besides the bogus confession is just that, speculation. This is the same type of rumors that have been flying off the shelves of this courthouse about the child and later repeated as fact. These 'rumors' and NOT fact are what many are using as their basis of opinion the child is guilty. It serves no purpose as to the truth to the matter but merely to insight towards the alleged guilt of the accused.
If you have a link that this is in fact true, the child confessed to anyone else other than what is portrayed on the distributed video, please provide it so this can be put to rest and deciphered as 'rumor' or fact.
Repeating over and over again one's opinion of something NOT in fact, will NOT make it so. We do NOT know this child ever confessed to anyone other than the two lying police officers that betrayed him. This is how gossip begins.
The def has been at the mercy of this court, this judge from the get go. Even when he attempted to hire a doctor to work with the child, the judge whined about the hourly rate. The def even offered to pay for the difference that the State would allow. In the end, the def got the doctor to agree to treat the child at a reduced fee and it was only THEN that the court authorized the child's treatement.
The def does NOT have an open check book like the pros does. It's ludicrous at best to ASSUME that the def has at their disposal, a myriad of private detectives and such to counter the pros claims and follow up with every 'tom, dick, and harry,' that has made baseless accusations against this child. Yes, even the def attorney's fee is paid by the State in this case, but most likely at a set rate. NOT unlimited funds like the State.
The FACT is, this child and his future, is being held by the pros and this judge to do with as they will. It's now up to the def to do what's best for this child. Take a CHANCE and go to trial, with the scores of doctors, institutions and strangers picking at his brain and then to have the State hold back a charge and go over this again, in 6 years? and take a CHANCE on the possibility of life in prison.....and even IF found innocent, his entire childhood will have been ruined by an over-zealous, rush to judgment pros and years of court hearings, trials, doctors, possible incarceration while all this is going on....or plea to a lessor charge, no contest,......and get psychiactric treatment and a clear record when he is 18?
Hostage,............he most likely has no choice. Then there's the FACT that there's possibly a double murderer walking among the innocent citizens of St. Johns, Arizona. An enemy among them.
JMHO
fran
http://ktar.com/?nid=6&sid=1085114&r=1
................snip..................
Prosecutors have not commented on the plea agreement, and defense attorneys have said little other than that it would assure the boy spends no time in the state juvenile corrections system. Brewer said his client could serve time in a county facility, but ``we certainly don't think'' he will.
OrdinaryLife
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 5,675
- Reaction score
- 36
OrdinaryLife
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
- Messages
- 5,675
- Reaction score
- 36
Fran, I love this post and I could not agree more with your opinions and thoughts. :clap::clap::clap:
"Brewer said his client could serve time in a county facility, but ``we certainly don't think'' he will."
Sounds like typical defense attorney speak to me!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
Online statistics
- Members online
- 89
- Guests online
- 2,269
- Total visitors
- 2,358