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

[fran]

Just to save space, I'll just say that I disagree with everything you posted Linda. On all levels.

But then, you probably knew I would.

JMHO
fran

 

[Bobbisangel]

This boy pled guilty and that kind of ends the whole thing as far as the justice system goes. We can have opinions but when it comes right down to it the judicial system has the say so. I would guess that this boy has talked to someone in a professional field about the murders. I would also guess that the people who did his evals talked about what happened that day. This boy is very open and so I would guess he talked to them about what happened.

What comes next for this boy? Anything more in court or is that all done? That is the only thing I'm interested in now that the boy had pled. Why argue and beat a dead horse?

 

[southcitymom]

This boy pled guilty and that kind of ends the whole thing as far as the justice system goes. We can have opinions but when it comes right down to it the judicial system has the say so. I would guess that this boy has talked to someone in a professional field about the murders. I would also guess that the people who did his evals talked about what happened that day. This boy is very open and so I would guess he talked to them about what happened.

What comes next for this boy? Anything more in court or is that all done? That is the only thing I'm interested in now that the boy had pled. Why argue and beat a dead horse?

From my understanding, the Court will be very involved in this child's life until he reaches the age of 18 (though I doubt the details of this involvement will be made public) - someone correct me if I am wrong.

 

[mostlylurking]

From my understanding, the Court will be very involved in this child's life until he reaches the age of 18 (though I doubt the details of this involvement will be made public) - someone correct me if I am wrong.

You're right, SCM.
There is still a status hearing and a dispostion to go.

The status hearing is for the evaluations of the drs who have been evaluating CR to be presented to Roca, basically. I don't think we will ever know publicly what they say or if they would have found CR competent to stand trial. It is my belief that they have all determined that to be a big fat no. (No, for those who will ask, I have no link & on this topic, I doubt I ever will, but I have a basis for having that opinion.) The disposition will come some time after the status hearing & I guess that is when Roca will determine if CR gets to stay with his mom or go to an RTC or whatever..... It is my hope that he will get to stay with his mom. I think it has already been determined that whatever the outcome, there will be a very tight leash & evaluations every 3 years or so until 18.

This is a retorical (sp??),....
but I will never understand how they could have let a child of this age sign a plea deal when the competency had not been determined. I mean really.... c'mon. How could a child of this age really understand the implications of that??? They couldn't!!!! IMO, of course. And, the positions of the posters from both sides of this have been posted ad nausium, so we don't have to go through reposting all of the pros & cons of that -- again. I just know that I will never get it & I will never agree with a legal system that allows it or allows children of this age to be treated like they think like adults, or a legal system that so violates anyone's rights (especially a child) as they have in this case. And like it or not, this child's were violated in the beginning process of this "investigation" & because of that, quite frankly, I think we will never know the real truth of what happened that day. I know many here think we already know it, but I DO NOT believe we do.

 

[Openmind]

From my understanding, the Court will be very involved in this child's life until he reaches the age of 18 (though I doubt the details of this involvement will be made public) - someone correct me if I am wrong.

Roca is expected to rely on the evaluations to determine if the boy should serve time in a county juvenile facility, be institutionalized for treatment or live with relatives.


Under the plea deal, the boy will serve no time in the state juvenile corrections system. He will receive diagnostic evaluations and mental health examinations when he's 12, 15 and 17.

The reviews are intended partly to determine whether the boy will pose any danger in the future.

From:
http://www.kpho.com/news/19767246/detail.html

 

[Fairy1]

This boy pled guilty and that kind of ends the whole thing as far as the justice system goes. We can have opinions but when it comes right down to it the judicial system has the say so. I would guess that this boy has talked to someone in a professional field about the murders. I would also guess that the people who did his evals talked about what happened that day. This boy is very open and so I would guess he talked to them about what happened.

What comes next for this boy? Anything more in court or is that all done? That is the only thing I'm interested in now that the boy had pled. Why argue and beat a dead horse?

He pled guilty to negligent homicide of the roommate, not his father. The psych evaluations have not yet been submitted to the court. My hope is that the docs that have been evaluating CR since the plea deal have learned the real truth - whatever that may be. His "confession" was made to LE officers who were, absolutely, intimidating him. The investigation stopped thereafter.

Based on the evidence to which we have been made privy, I cannot say, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this child is guilty of anything. I sincerely hope those who are being paid to evaluate him now are digging deeper than the court has thus far.

IMO, no one here is beating a dead horse. We simply have not processed the wee bit of evidence made public the same way.

 

[southcitymom]

You're right, SCM.
There is still a status hearing and a dispostion to go.

The status hearing is for the evaluations of the drs who have been evaluating CR to be presented to Roca, basically. I don't think we will ever know publicly what they say or if they would have found CR competent to stand trial. It is my belief that they have all determined that to be a big fat no. (No, for those who will ask, I have no link & on this topic, I doubt I ever will, but I have a basis for having that opinion.) The disposition will come some time after the status hearing & I guess that is when Roca will determine if CR gets to stay with his mom or go to an RTC or whatever..... It is my hope that he will get to stay with his mom. I think it has already been determined that whatever the outcome, there will be a very tight leash & evaluations every 3 years or so until 18.

This is a retorical (sp??),....
but I will never understand how they could have let a child of this age sign a plea deal when the competency had not been determined. I mean really.... c'mon. How could a child of this age really understand the implications of that??? They couldn't!!!! IMO, of course. And, the positions of the posters from both sides of this have been posted ad nausium, so we don't have to go through reposting all of the pros & cons of that -- again. I just know that I will never get it & I will never agree with a legal system that allows it or allows children of this age to be treated like they think like adults, or a legal system that so violates anyone's rights (especially a child) as they have in this case. And like it or not, this child's were violated in the beginning process of this "investigation" & because of that, quite frankly, I think we will never know the real truth of what happened that day. I know many here think we already know it, but I DO NOT believe we do.

Great post, mostly, and I agree with many of your opinions. I personally do not believe any 8 year old is legally competent to stand trial as an adult. I too hope he gets to stay with his Mom and hope the Court and its officers keep a regular presence in this child's life. I also agree that all of this should be private and not for public consumption.

I do not mind them allowing him to enter a plea deal for a number of reasons - the main underlying factor for my opinion is that I do believe most everyone personally involved with the child has tried to the best of their ability to balance mercy and justice in this extremely unusual case. While I don't believe 8 is old enough to be legally competent, I do believe that 8 is old enough to understand right and wrong in a basic, rudimentary sense.

I would not be "pleased" with the extremes - ie, an outcome that tried this child in a court of law as an adult OR an outcome that "let this child go" because he is not legally competent to stand trial as an adult. I think meeting in the middle of those extremes shows uncommon wisdom and a faith that, perhaps, this young person can be helped. Since I'm one of Websleuth's resident bleeding hearts , that works for me.

I also understand that mistakes have been made in this case and not everything has been handled perfectly, but - in my career of crime watching - that happens over and over again. I've yet to see a perfect investigation, hearing, trial....Frankly, I feel like they've all done a pretty terrific job of navigating the numerous complexities these murders raise.

I continue to be fascinated with the passions evoked by this case. As I have stated before, I do not believe we would still be discussing it vigorously many threads later if not for his age.

Finally, I agree that we may never satisfactorily know what really went down that day and why. I will go so far as to state that the boy himself does not know why. Because I personally am 100% in favor of as much of this process as possible being kept confidential, I have to accept that I won't get all my answers.

But still, I get the frustration surrounding that and I feel it too - all of us want to be able to wrap up a case where an elementary school child kills his father and another adult with seeming premeditation. Some of us wrap it up by assuming he is a psychopath; some of us wrap it up by assuming there's no way he could have done it; and some of us land in all the grey areas.

ETA - like some and unlike others, I do believe we have all processed what we know to be the "evidence" very thoroughly in these threads and, surprise, surprise, we have come to different conclusions!

 

[Trino]

I don't know if this has been posted, but here's an update on his probation rules. No more going to ball games. I cannot imagine a 9 1/2 yr old living under these conditions and not going "stir crazy."

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/doc...ER REGARDING FURLOUGH CONDITIONS 06162009.pdf

 

[southcitymom]

I don't know if this has been posted, but here's an update on his probation rules. No more going to ball games. I cannot imagine a 9 1/2 yr old living under these conditions and not going "stir crazy."

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/doc...ER REGARDING FURLOUGH CONDITIONS 06162009.pdf

Thank you, Trino. It does sound lonely - you would have to be awfully creative to help the child have much of a social/recreational life. Still, I understand these terms - they seem fairly standard given the crimes committed.

 

[azmama]

I don't know if this has been posted, but here's an update on his probation rules. No more going to ball games. I cannot imagine a 9 1/2 yr old living under these conditions and not going "stir crazy."

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/doc...ER REGARDING FURLOUGH CONDITIONS 06162009.pdf

Thank you, Trino. It does sound lonely - you would have to be awfully creative to help the child have much of a social/recreational life. Still, I understand these terms - they seem fairly standard given the crimes committed.

FYI, he never was at a baseball game.... lol

As well the terms of his furlough do not disallow him from socializing, or interacting with others, you might want to check your facts.

 

[southcitymom]

FYI, he never was at a baseball game.... lol

As well the terms of his furlough do not disallow him from socializing, or interacting with others, you might want to check your facts.

The terms of his probation still sound lonely to me - no attending school or public events - no leaving the house without a caretaker....I agree with Trino that this would be hard for a 9 and 1/2 year old boy, though, as I said earlier, I understand the need for such restrictions.

And, of course, there are then the natural barriers to socialization that will occur regardless of a Court's order - ie., the fact that many people who know this child's history will be uncomfortable to have him playing with their children or socializing with their family....again, such a situation would be hard on anyone - especially someone trying to "re-develop" in a healthier way - much less a young person.

 

[azmama]

The terms of his probation still sound lonely to me - no attending school or public events - no leaving the house without a caretaker....I agree with Trino that this would be hard for a 9 and 1/2 year old boy, though, as I said earlier, I understand the need for such restrictions.

And, of course, there are then the natural barriers to socialization that will occur regardless of a Court's order - ie., the fact that many people who know this child's history will be uncomfortable to have him playing with their children or socializing with their family....again, such a situation would be hard on anyone - especially someone trying to "re-develop" in a healthier way - much less a young person.

Oh, agreed, most definitely!

The terms will change however, once the results from the evals come in, I suspect this is very much the reason for them "not being in yet". The prosecution is finally on a deadline for these, no more delays!

 

[Fairy1]

ST. JOHNS, Ariz. (AP) -- A 9-year-old eastern Arizona boy who admitted to killing his father's roommate will learn what his punishment will be on Sept. 22.

Apache County Superior Judge Michael Roca set the sentencing date on Thursday, months after the boy struck a deal with prosecutors in which he pleaded guilty to one count of negligent homicide in the death of his father's roommate. Prosecutors dropped charges against the boy in his father's death.

http://www.fox11az.com/news/topstor...judge-sentencing-9-year-old-boy.490ce7d0.html

The evaluations will not be made public. Hoping the nature of his sentence will give us a clue as to their findings.

 

[colette]

The latest...

The prosecutor "tendered a plea offer to the juvenile's attorneys that would resolve all the charges in the juvenile court contingent on the results of the mental health evaluations."

Candelaria was responding to a defense motion seeking to block him from dropping one of two first-degree murder charges the boy is facing for the shooting deaths of his father, Vincent Romero, 29, and Timothy Romans, 39, earlier this month.

Defense attorney Benjamin Brewer argued in a Nov. 25 filing that prosecutors wanted the charge dismissed so they could refile it when the boy was older and press the case in adult court.

The prosecutor pressed for the dismissal because the judicial system isn't equipped to deal with an 8-year-old charged with murder.

If the boy is found incompetent because of his age, he wouldn't fit the definition of a mentally disordered person and no treatment would be available.

The boy is being held in a county juvenile facility, although he was allowed a 48-hour furlough to spend Thanksgiving with his mother.

Brewer (the boy's lawyer) said he is now back in custody. The next court hearing is set for Dec. 8.

So he is back in custody......


http://www.sunjournal.com/node/90105

 

[southcitymom]

The latest...

The prosecutor "tendered a plea offer to the juvenile's attorneys that would resolve all the charges in the juvenile court contingent on the results of the mental health evaluations."

Candelaria was responding to a defense motion seeking to block him from dropping one of two first-degree murder charges the boy is facing for the shooting deaths of his father, Vincent Romero, 29, and Timothy Romans, 39, earlier this month.

Defense attorney Benjamin Brewer argued in a Nov. 25 filing that prosecutors wanted the charge dismissed so they could refile it when the boy was older and press the case in adult court.

The prosecutor pressed for the dismissal because the judicial system isn't equipped to deal with an 8-year-old charged with murder.

If the boy is found incompetent because of his age, he wouldn't fit the definition of a mentally disordered person and no treatment would be available.

The boy is being held in a county juvenile facility, although he was allowed a 48-hour furlough to spend Thanksgiving with his mother.

Brewer (the boy's lawyer) said he is now back in custody. The next court hearing is set for Dec. 8.

So he is back in custody......


http://www.sunjournal.com/node/90105

Thanks for the update. I am surprised that he is back in custody. I wonder when that happened and why.

 

[Salem]

Ummmm..... this article is from November 2008. The child is not back in custody. At least not based on this article. The article is saying he is back in custody AFTER his Thanksgiving furlough with his mom in 2008.

Salem

 

[dgfred]

So the 'update' is from Nov and Dec :hand: ? I think the next update will be in September, so as you can see this boy has been in 'limbo' for quite awhile living with his mom. This will be the actual sentencing for what type of treatment the boy will receive. Your article is very outdated.

 

[colette]

Oh I apologize! I google this case from time to time and this article popped up with the date 8/9/2009 and the page had today's date. I wondered why the boy was back in custody geez, sorry. Well at least it bumped the thread.

 

[dgfred]

Well no worries, thanks for the bump. We will let you off with a :slap: .

 

[Trino]

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/doc...ow Juvenile to Attend School in Detention.pdf

The boy will now be receiving his education full-time in the detention center rather than at home.