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

[oceanblueeyes]

This link discusses all avenues of a criminal case concerning a juvenile in Arizona.

http://www.co.apache.az.us/attorney/juvenile_criminal_case_process.htm

I believe the defense was worried that JR would mandate that the boy be retained in a mental treatment facility and then be reassessed in 240 days. Even Wood said the boy could be taught during that time to understand the proceedings.

The standards are not the same concerning incompetency in juveniles and adults.

Juveniles are to be assessed to determine if they can assist in their defense in a trial. With an adult it is a question of did they know the wrongfulness of their acts.

Imo the boy does understand guilt. And he also understood his rights in the probable cause hearing.

Quote:
Incompetence is different than insanity. Incompetent means an inability to assist in one's own defense while insanity means an inability to distinguish right from wrong.

ETA: Plea Agreements
Before the Adjudication Hearing, the Deputy County Attorney prosecuting the case may discuss the possibility of a negotiated case settlement with the juvenile's defense attorney. The defense attorney may seek an agreement for the juvenile to plead guilty to the original charge(s) or to some lesser charge(s), a dismissal of certain charges, or a commitment from the Deputy County Attorney not to file additional charges.

If an agreement is reached, the juvenile enters a plea of guilty as agreed, and signs a form declaring that he/she is knowingly giving up various rights, including his/her right to an Adjudication Hearing and the right to cross-examine witnesses. If you are a victim, you have the right to be present and to make a statement expressing your opinion about the plea agreement. The Judge may consider your opinion when deciding whether or not to accept the plea agreement. Upon the acceptance of the plea agreement, the Judge will enter a finding of delinquency against the juvenile defendant.

It is important to note that there is no mandatory sentencing in the juvenile system. This means the judge has the same sentencing options available whether the juvenile pleads to a felony or a misdemeanor.
imoo

 

[fran]

There's a professional that stated the child was incompetent and the GAL doesn't feel he is either. As this is their j o b and they've interviewed the child, I think I'll go along with what they say. They did go to school for just this sort of knowlege and expertise.

JMHO
fran

 

[oceanblueeyes]

There's a professional that stated the child was incompetent and the GAL doesn't feel he is either. As this is their j o b and they've interviewed the child, I think I'll go along with what they say. They did go to school for just this sort of knowlege and expertise.

JMHO
fran

I am not sure what you mean, Fran. I am sure that Wood, Brewer, Whiting, Carylon and Judge Roca also have college degrees and knows the laws in Arizona.

imoo

 

[southcitymom]

I am not sure what you mean, Fran. I am sure that Wood, Brewer, Whiting, Carylon and Judge Roca also have college degrees and knows the laws in Arizona.

imoo

In Georgia, the training to become a GAL is a one-day course.

I have a great deal of respect for GALs, but I don't believe they are the only people involved in children's cases that care about the children.

 

[OrdinaryLife]

Please. The child is incompetent because at his age there is no way he could possibly take in legalese. ie: the meaning of anything that has to do with his rights. Even adults have issues understanding this stuff. Hence, lawyers representing their client.

I do not understand the point of defining incompetence vs insanity where we all know insanity was never an issue. Age incompetence was. By the professionals in this case.

I quote Albert Lassen who is "the child's" guardian ad litem, "told me he may ask that the plea be thrown out, given reports that both psychologists found the boy incompetent". This is a quote to newspaper reporter. Here's the link.

www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2009/02/24/20090224roberts0225.html

imho

 

[fran]

I am not sure what you mean, Fran. I am sure that Wood, Brewer, Whiting, Carylon and Judge Roca also have college degrees and knows the laws in Arizona.

imoo

Obviously I wasn't talking about the lawyers that have law degrees to be able to assess the child competent or incompetent. They work with the legal aspect and the judge's decision should be based on the doctors assessment. Of course when you have a pros, def, and judge who side-step the competency hearing and make a plea deal with someone who's most likely, NOT competent to make such a decision, you have an appealable plea deal.

JMHO
fran

 

[OrdinaryLife]

I am not sure what you mean, Fran. I am sure that Wood, Brewer, Whiting, Carylon and Judge Roca also have college degrees and knows the laws in Arizona.

imoo

IMHO, I'm sure you must have misunderstood Fran's post regarding expertise of educated individuals. I did not read anything that took away experience from anyone involved in this case. If I'm not mistaken, Fran's post was concerning the GAL and his experience. It happens to me when I read/post too fast. I hate when that happens.

 

[Openmind]

Please. The child is incompetent because at his age there is no way he could possibly take in legalese. ie: the meaning of anything that has to do with his rights. Even adults have issues understanding this stuff. Hence, lawyers representing their client.

I do not understand the point of defining incompetence vs insanity where we all know insanity was never an issue. Age incompetence was. By the professionals in this case.

I quote Albert Lassen who is "the child's" guardian ad litem, "told me he may ask that the plea be thrown out, given reports that both psychologists found the boy incompetent". This is a quote to newspaper reporter. Here's the link.

www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2009/02/24/20090224roberts0225.html

imho

There is no way a nine year old can understand the long term ramifications of this plea. This is an overwhelming procedure for an adult little more a barely nine year old child.

I was surprised Wood and Roca got away with this considering how the boy's mother so adamantly opposed him signing this plea. What the plea does is lock this down and shuts everyone up.

The boy's guardian ad litem is an attorney.

I am a GAL and my training involved thirty hours of course work, and it is a lot of information to absorb. The one unique feature of being a GAL is the singular focus on what is best for the child which might oppose the wishes of the parents and attorneys. I do wonder why the boy's GAL was not in court the day of the plea.

 

[OrdinaryLife]

There is no way a nine year old can understand the long term ramifications of this plea. This is an overwhelming procedure for an adult little more a barely nine year old child.

I was surprised Wood and Roca got away with this considering how the boy's mother so adamantly opposed him signing this plea. What the plea does is lock this down and shuts everyone up.

The boy's guardian ad litem is an attorney.

I am a GAL and my training involved thirty hours of course work, and it is a lot of information to absorb. The one unique feature of being a GAL is the singular focus on what is best for the child which might oppose the wishes of the parents and attorneys. I do wonder why the boy's GAL was not in court the day of the plea.

That's exactly what I find disturbing. Why wasn't this child's GAL not in court? It seems that the legal interest for this boy has been tossed aside, legally. I do not understand why this is. Doesn't hurt everyone here? Not just the Defense, but even the DA's case? I'm baffled by this...

 

[oceanblueeyes]

There's a professional that stated the child was incompetent and the GAL doesn't feel he is either. As this is their j o b and they've interviewed the child, I think I'll go along with what they say. They did go to school for just this sort of knowledge and expertise.

JMHO
fran

Well for some reason he says he may ask for it to be set aside if..........

So he doesn't seem real sure what is in the best interest of the child.

I wish that the plea deal was set aside and all the charges back on the table.

I think if that were the case then JR could rule to dismiss count one or he would remand him to a treatment facility for 240 days.

Even Wood said the boy could be taught the legalese in six months time to then become competent to stand trial.

It just isn't right that Vincent Romero received absolutely no justice for being cruelly cut down in the prime of his life and the justice given to Tim is nothing short of shameful imo.

If this had been a 40 year old man he would have gotten the death penalty imo.

But because the taker of life was 8 he gets a sweetheart deal.

imoo

 

[fran]

The DA cannot refile charges against this child, even if the plea deal is set aside. It's a done deal.

I believe I already stated that the GAL said he will decide in the best interest for the child. I think that's pretty clear.

JMHO
fran

 

[Bobbisangel]

That may be the case - we really don't know. But full understanding means a good deal more than that in a legal sense - it encompasses him knowing and understanding a great many rights and consequences (both in a trial or a plea) that, even with a lawyer, no 9-year-old in the world can really "get." IMHO. Grown adults sometimes don't even "get" it.

If he is to young to "get it" now even though the judge talked to him in language the boy could relate to maybe the solution is to put this boy in one of the facilitys that the judge or Pros mentioned until he is 18 years. Then see if he is old enough to "get it" and try him for the murder of his dad. This way the boy would get inpatient treatment for 9 years and then serve his sentence in an adult prison for the murder of his dad. Can't see why it can't be done that way. He would be a danger to others if he is just released with no consequences at all. What an example that would set for other young kids like the 11 yr old that murdered his dad's girlfriend and unborn baby who will be tried as an adult. I wonder if that 11 yr old was aware of this case and the possibility of this 9 yr old going home?

 

[OrdinaryLife]

I am a 50 year old woman who just went through a divorce as well as other legal issues that are being addressed. I've been doing this, with counsel, for a year and I still do not get what it means. With the help of legal counsel. How is an 8-9 year old going to understand the legal words regarding this huge thing? Seriously, I am no where near what this child is legally going through and I, as an adult, don't get the wording of it all and what it means for me!

What are we missing here? If I, as an adult and am far from ignorant/stupid when it comes to much, cannot understand the legal words and how they are phrased, how is a child suppose to????

 

[southcitymom]

.... It seems that the legal interest for this boy has been tossed aside, legally. .....

I don't understand how you arrive at this opinion - the child had and has an attorney looking out for his legal interest. That's the attorney's job.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

The DA cannot refile charges against this child, even if the plea deal is set aside. It's a done deal.

I believe I already stated that the GAL said he will decide in the best interest for the child. I think that's pretty clear.

JMHO
fran

Where does it say if it is appealed and won it can't be set aside? If the appeal is won then it null and voids the plea agreement.

That would be like saying if a conviction is overturned it cant be retried because there has already been a trial.

When an appeal is won it sets everything back to square one.

imoo

 

[southcitymom]

If he is to young to "get it" now even though the judge talked to him in language the boy could relate to maybe the solution is to put this boy in one of the facilitys that the judge or Pros mentioned until he is 18 years. Then see if he is old enough to "get it" and try him for the murder of his dad. This way the boy would get inpatient treatment for 9 years and then serve his sentence in an adult prison for the murder of his dad. Can't see why it can't be done that way. He would be a danger to others if he is just released with no consequences at all. What an example that would set for other young kids like the 11 yr old that murdered his dad's girlfriend and unborn baby who will be tried as an adult. I wonder if that 11 yr old was aware of this case and the possibility of this 9 yr old going home?

I hate the idea of waiting until someone turns 18 and then trying them for a crime they committed as a child. It certainly gets in the way of an offender's right to a speedy trial. I get your point, but I just don't believe that children who murder are persuaded by sentences other children who murder have received.

 

[OrdinaryLife]

I don't understand how you arrive at this opinion - the child had and has an attorney looking out for his legal interest. That's the attorney's job.

My opinion came from the fact that the GAL assigned for this child was not there for him during legal proceedings. He is the child's guardian ad litem. That's all.

 

[southcitymom]

The DA cannot refile charges against this child, even if the plea deal is set aside. It's a done deal.

I believe I already stated that the GAL said he will decide in the best interest for the child. I think that's pretty clear.

JMHO
fran

That's not my understanding - if a plea is set aside, I believe everything starts over from the beginning.

 

[Openmind]

Even Wood said the boy could be taught the legalese in six months time to then become competent to stand trial.

I wonder how many nine year old clients Wood has represented. Trust me, I know you can get a child to repeat information and get them to sound quite proficient when discussing the details and facts, but, in truth, they are just parroting what they have been taught. This lawyer may know the law, but he does not truly understand the cognitive ability of a child this young. If it is that easy, any nine year old could be a lawyer.

It just isn't right that Vincent Romero received absolutely no justice for being cruelly cut down in the prime of his life and the justice given to Tim is nothing short of shameful imo.

If Vincent was as loving a parent as he has been portrayed, I would think he would want his child to have the help he needs to recover from this terrible event and live as normal as life as he can. I wouldn't want my child to have his entire life destroyed by this.

If this had been a 40 year old man he would have gotten the death penalty imo.

But he isn't a 40 year old man and that makes a great deal of difference.

 

[southcitymom]

My opinion came from the fact that the GAL assigned for this child was not there for him during legal proceedings. He is the child's guardian ad litem. That's all.

Do you know what the GAL did in terms of this case? Was he at any of the proceedings?