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

[Formynextnovel]

Oop, also meant to say to fran than I am so sorry for the loss of your husband. I know there is never any getting over that. My heart goes to you.

 

[Salem]

Shadowraiths - I agree with you 100%. But can you please tell me what IST and afaics mean?

TIA,

Salem

 

[shadowraiths]

Shadowraiths - I agree with you 100%. But can you please tell me what IST and afaics mean?

TIA,

Salem

IST = Incompetent to Stand Trial
afaics = as far as i can see

hth! <= hope this helps.

 

[southcitymom]

Actually, the only reason I can think they would have to seal this info is to protect this kid. Yes, an 8-year-old, (in my experience) would not be comptent to stand trial, because he/she COULD NOT understand the full implication any action/decision in this matter might have for the rest of his/her life. I can't help but intuit that in this case, those who know the most are protecting this child from the ramifications of an action he could not fully understand, or therefore, take fully to his responsibilty.

I feel the same way.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Here's another false confession story - these boys were 7 and 8. http://www.injusticeline.com/confess.html

~ After hours of interrogation, each boy had agreed with the officers that he had indeed been involved in the murder, and that their intention was to steal her bike. ~ end snip

These boys were interrogated for hours before confessing. I agree that the CR was not, however, the boy was told that someone saw him. So obviously, if someone saw him then it must be true, he must have committed this crime - ergo he confesses. St. Johns LE set this kid up to confess and the evidence is in the video tape that LE released to convince us that the child was guilty.

I'm not buying it. I think what happened to CR is exactly like what happened to the two boys in the article so I don't think there is any truth in that confession. I feel very badly for this boy that there is no one to stand up for him and see to it that a thorough investigation is done and that the child not agree to anything until it can be shown that the child was actually involved. My thought is that at this point, the child probably doesn't even know what is true and what is not and this plea deal is only going to further confuse the reality for him.

Salem

IMO The boy knows exactly what happened.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

IMO The boy knows exactly what happened.

ITA!

I think they had the evidence on this boy. He already knew the confession had been tossed and so did his attorneys yet he still plead guilty to homicide.

I don't think it had anything to do with the confession but the evidence uncovered against him.

THAT is what made him plea to his sweetheart deal.

IMOO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Imo, they're backpedaling big time. When this case first broke, they were (metaphorically) pounding their chests... "we have a confession. we're going to try him as an adult for two counts of murder one. he coldly planned an executed these murders in such a sophisticated manner the case is open and shut... blah, blah, blah... "

The problem is, had they gone forward as they originally announced to the nation, he would have been found IST and no means to restore competency within the required time frame, the case would have been thrown out, and they would have had egg on their face for making promises they could not possibly keep. And, afaics, the judge recognized the faux pas in the making and hence, put forth the gag order.

As for the plea? I am still surprised his council accepted. And fwiw, no, the boy did not accept it. Regardless of what people think. He is not old enough to even know what a plea is, much less to accept one.

Imho, the case was handled unprofessionally by all involved. Regardless of whether or not this child murdered those men. But hey, these aren't the first to let the potential for publicity cloud their better judgment. And I doubt they will be the last. In fact, the first case where people were fired for the stunts they pulled, playing to the media, was the Wuornos case. And yes, she most certainly was guilty. Even amidst the circus that ensued.

Due to the dire seriousness of this case I believe Judge Roca would have taken the precautionary route and would have ruled that he be reassessed in the 240 day time period.

Even Wood admitted that if the boy was educated for that amount of time he could understand the legal ends and outs of a trial proceeding. Imo Wood nor the boy were willing to take that chance.

Simply being 8 is not the only criteria used but in this case it did help him greatly due to him probably being the youngest accused double murderer in AZ.

It would be very interesting to learn if other juveniles around this boy's age has taken plea deals in AZ, since a child of 8 can be charged and convicted of a crime. I expect he is not the first young juvenile to do so, even though their crimes may have been lessor than double murders, the premise and standard would be the same.

imo

 

[Salem]

IST = Incompetent to Stand Trial
afaics = as far as i can see

hth! <= hope this helps.

Thank you Shadow!

Salem

 

[fran]

Every day I am amazed by this case. The court's continued decisions and legal filings are very disturbing. This is all being done in plain sight and NO ONE is saying anything. I don't get it.

I originally felt it was just plain incompetence of the St. John's PD. As the case continued, it began looking like a case of CYA from the pros on behalf of the PD, but then it turned into CYA for the pros as well. It appears to me, from the outside looking in, that the pros is now being aided by the judge to push this case through and sweep it under the rug.

The judge is supposed to be neutral.

Why is the pros and this judge, so intent on keeping what they want sealed, but yet letting just enough out to make it look like they're handling this case within the law?

Why do they want the psychiatrists reports sealed?
According to the most recent filings, the GAL requested a copy of the child's psche evaluations. The GAL is being allowed to review these, but he's ordered by the court not to let a second party see them.

Why?

I have a clue for this court. The cat is already out of the bag. The court was aware of BOTH psyche evaluations BERFORE the plea deal. I've read that a judge is obligated, before signing off on any plea deal, to be sure that ALL avenues have been investigated, eliminating all other possible suspects. Wouldn't that include on whether the defendent would be competent to stand trial?

Now, who is it that wants this case file sealed?

I don't know legally, but it appears to me that the mother would have a good case of prosecutorial misconduct and possibly even judicial misconduct. But alas, she's a woman of meager means, a single mom, with a CHILD facing the entire State of Arizona, and no one cares.

They may be able to seal these files, but fwiw, I believe they've already released just enough, to give the appearance of mishandling, etc. IF I were Eryn, I'd contact every legal avenue I could to see if there is ONE person out there, with the ability, to represent her child and call this pros and judge to task.

This is NOT what our justice system is about. This case does NOT speak well for the State of Arizona.

I'm disgusted.

fran

PS OT......thank you to those of you who mentioned my husband. Yes, it's been 1 1/2 years, but some things you never get over. I appreciate your kind thoughts and words......fran:blowkiss:

 

[fran]

This is about the controversy surrounding plea bargains. It kind of hits a cord with this case, for me anyway.

fran

PS..........PERHAPS, Eryn should get the book mentioned in the last paragraph copied. When Innocent People Are Wrongly Convicted,.....fran

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plea_bargain#Controversy



The United States Supreme Court has recognized plea bargaining as both an essential and desirable part of the criminal justice system. (Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 261 [1971]). The benefits of plea-bargaining are said to be obvious: the relief of court congestion, alleviation of the risks and uncertainties of trial, and its information gathering value." (People V. Glendenning, 127 Misc.2d 880,882 (1985)) Notably, in 1975 the Attorney-General of Alaska, Avrum Gross, ordered an end to all plea-bargaining;[1] subsequent attorneys-general continued the practice. Similar consequences are observed in New Orleans, Ventura County, California, and in Oakland County, Michigan, where plea bargaining has been terminated. Bidinotto found:[2]

“ ...ending plea bargaining has put responsibility back into every level of our system: police did better investigating; prosecutors and lawyers began preparing their cases better; lazy judges were compelled to spend more time in court and control their calendars more efficiently. Most importantly, justice was served – and criminals began to realize that they could not continue their arrogant manipulation of a paper-tiger court system.

..............snip.................

Plea bargaining is also criticized, particularly outside the United States, on the grounds that its close relationship with rewards, threats and coercion potentially endangers the correct legal outcome.[4] Coercive plea bargaining has been criticized on the grounds that it infringes an individual's rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, incorporated in the UK's Human Rights Act 1998.[5]

In the 1991 book Presumed Guilty: When Innocent People Are Wrongly Convicted, author Martin Yant discusses the use of coercion in plea bargaining. (p. 172)

 

[fran]

Even the victim's eyewitness identification can be wrong.

Yes, Tim's wife claimed she 'heard' the child's voice. But did she? Or, IF she did, he said he called Tim. It's in his statements. He doesn't deny it. But,.....he claims he was outside, down the street, 4 and then 2 doors down.

JMHO
fran

PS....Picking Cotton is a book about the below mentioned case.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/06/60minutes/main4848039.shtml

Eyewitness: How Accurate Is Visual Memory?

 

[Salem]

Maybe we can send an email to Nancy Grace and the child's advocate, Susan ??? (I forget her last name) and see if they would look at the case from the legal standpoints of prosecuting this child? Do you think Nancy would be too rough? Its a thought. One is a child advocate and the other is a former prosecuter. Or maybe Gloria Alman? Think that's her name, she also is a woman/family advocate. Somebody must be willing to take a look at this case, out side of Arizona, to be sure this boy does not suffer for the rest of his life if he did not do this crime.

Salem

 

[Openmind]

Due to the dire seriousness of this case I believe Judge Roca would have taken the precautionary route and would have ruled that he be reassessed in the 240 day time period.

Even Wood admitted that if the boy was educated for that amount of time he could understand the legal ends and outs of a trial proceeding. Imo Wood nor the boy were willing to take that chance.

Simply being 8 is not the only criteria used but in this case it did help him greatly due to him probably being the youngest accused double murderer in AZ.

It would be very interesting to learn if other juveniles around this boy's age has taken plea deals in AZ, since a child of 8 can be charged and convicted of a crime. I expect he is not the first young juvenile to do so, even though their crimes may have been lessor than double murders, the premise and standard would be the same.

imo

I don't care what Wood says but explaining the criminal system to a nine year old child three times, or repeatedly for the next eight months, it will not make him capable of understanding the complexities of the law on the level of an adult. Due to his age he lacks the life experiences or the maturity to fully comprehend the magnitude of what all this means, or how it will affect him for the rest of his life. He is nine and no matter how much anyone wants to make him out to be some junior criminal genius -- planning, executing, entrapping the police into taking a confession that would have to be thrown out, and then wheeling and dealing to wrangle his way out from under this charge-- it is not possible. And his attorney is not about to say his client is incapable of understanding these dealings -- not unless he wants give up his career as a lawyer.

 

[southcitymom]

ITA!

I think they had the evidence on this boy. He already knew the confession had been tossed and so did his attorneys yet he still plead guilty to homicide.

I don't think it had anything to do with the confession but the evidence uncovered against him.

THAT is what made him plea to his sweetheart deal.

IMOO

I agree with everything you posted.

 

[southcitymom]

I don't care what Wood says but explaining the criminal system to a nine year old child three times, or repeatedly for the next eight months, it will not make him capable of understanding the complexities of the law on the level of an adult. Due to his age he lacks the life experiences or the maturity to fully comprehend the magnitude of what all this means, or how it will affect him for the rest of his life. He is nine and no matter how much anyone wants to make him out to be some junior criminal genius -- planning, executing, entrapping the police into taking a confession that would have to be thrown out, and then wheeling and dealing to wrangle his way out from under this charge-- it is not possible. And his attorney is not about to say his client is incapable of understanding these dealings -- not unless he wants give up his career as a lawyer.

I totally agree that, by virtue of age, an 8-9 year old is not capable of "getting" all of this. I believe this fact and his age have worked in his favor in this matter and that the deal he has entered into through his attorney benefits him enormously.

 

[southcitymom]

Every day I am amazed by this case. The court's continued decisions and legal filings are very disturbing. This is all being done in plain sight and NO ONE is saying anything. I don't get it.

I originally felt it was just plain incompetence of the St. John's PD. As the case continued, it began looking like a case of CYA from the pros on behalf of the PD, but then it turned into CYA for the pros as well. It appears to me, from the outside looking in, that the pros is now being aided by the judge to push this case through and sweep it under the rug.

The judge is supposed to be neutral.

Why is the pros and this judge, so intent on keeping what they want sealed, but yet letting just enough out to make it look like they're handling this case within the law?

Why do they want the psychiatrists reports sealed?
According to the most recent filings, the GAL requested a copy of the child's psche evaluations. The GAL is being allowed to review these, but he's ordered by the court not to let a second party see them.

Why?

I have a clue for this court. The cat is already out of the bag. The court was aware of BOTH psyche evaluations BERFORE the plea deal. I've read that a judge is obligated, before signing off on any plea deal, to be sure that ALL avenues have been investigated, eliminating all other possible suspects. Wouldn't that include on whether the defendent would be competent to stand trial?

Now, who is it that wants this case file sealed?

I don't know legally, but it appears to me that the mother would have a good case of prosecutorial misconduct and possibly even judicial misconduct. But alas, she's a woman of meager means, a single mom, with a CHILD facing the entire State of Arizona, and no one cares.

They may be able to seal these files, but fwiw, I believe they've already released just enough, to give the appearance of mishandling, etc. IF I were Eryn, I'd contact every legal avenue I could to see if there is ONE person out there, with the ability, to represent her child and call this pros and judge to task.

This is NOT what our justice system is about. This case does NOT speak well for the State of Arizona.

I'm disgusted.

fran

PS OT......thank you to those of you who mentioned my husband. Yes, it's been 1 1/2 years, but some things you never get over. I appreciate your kind thoughts and words......fran:blowkiss:

Hey Fran - it is very very common for children's psych records to be sealed in criminal cases. Again - this is usually for the protection of the child. I doubt we will ever see those records but I do not consider that strange or think that subterfuge is involved.

IMHO, all these adults closest to this boy's case (Judge, Pros, his attorneys) are rule protecting him - I believe they know he's guilty, but they have hope that they can get him help. In the few pieces of information that continue to emerge, I don't see an innocent boy being railroaded, I see a guilty boy trying to be helped.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Hey Fran - it is very very common for children's psych records to be sealed in criminal cases. Again - this is usually for the protection of the child. I doubt we will ever see those records but I do not consider that strange or think that subterfuge is involved.

IMHO, all these adults closest to this boy's case (Judge, Pros, his attorneys) are rule protecting him - I believe they know he's guilty, but they have hope that they can get him help. In the few pieces of information that continue to emerge, I don't see an innocent boy being railroaded, I see a guilty boy trying to be helped.

That is the way I see it too.

I still do not believe this child is the only very young juvenile to plead guilty in the AZ juvenile court system though.

I think Judge Roca was very aware of that when he accepted the boy's plea deal.

And I still believe that Roca would have taken the more precautionary route since this case involved two premeditated homicides instead of lessor charges and he would have ruled that he be reassessed in 240 days. I do believe that all parties involved have had other cases involving juvenile defendants and they all know this plea will stand. I think they had other case law that they reviewed.

The boy's age right from the get go became the crux of this case and its disposition. He was too young to be placed with other youthful offenders in a detention facility who are older than him. Roca said that the juvenile system is not set up to handle cases like this one.

I think all parties wholeheartedly agreed that he is guilty of these crimes but knows that in the best interest of the child that he be given extensive mental therapy hoping and praying that he is treatable and can become a productive member of society once he is cut loose from his rigid probation at the age of 18.

ITA! And I believe why the other evidence is sealed tight too is also in the best interest of the child that it remains hidden and unknown except to the legally authorized parties.

imo

 

[colette]

Remember one thing about this boy... he really could not stop talking. He was talking to the police about his Dad's cell phone, someone else about the spankings, he probably did all kinds of talking that didn't help his case.

 

[fran]

Maybe we can send an email to Nancy Grace and the child's advocate, Susan ??? (I forget her last name) and see if they would look at the case from the legal standpoints of prosecuting this child? Do you think Nancy would be too rough? Its a thought. One is a child advocate and the other is a former prosecuter. Or maybe Gloria Alman? Think that's her name, she also is a woman/family advocate. Somebody must be willing to take a look at this case, out side of Arizona, to be sure this boy does not suffer for the rest of his life if he did not do this crime.

Salem

I don't know about Nancy Grace or Susan? but Gloria Allred might be interested. Course, Gloria is involved in the Octomom case right now, LOL, NOT on the side of the Octomom, I might add.

I read on another message board that someone had contacted the Innocence Project, just an observer, I believe though.

All it will take is the right person to see how mishandled this case was, to go to bat for him.

JMHO
fran

 

[fran]

I don't care what Wood says but explaining the criminal system to a nine year old child three times, or repeatedly for the next eight months, it will not make him capable of understanding the complexities of the law on the level of an adult. Due to his age he lacks the life experiences or the maturity to fully comprehend the magnitude of what all this means, or how it will affect him for the rest of his life. He is nine and no matter how much anyone wants to make him out to be some junior criminal genius -- planning, executing, entrapping the police into taking a confession that would have to be thrown out, and then wheeling and dealing to wrangle his way out from under this charge-- it is not possible. And his attorney is not about to say his client is incapable of understanding these dealings -- not unless he wants give up his career as a lawyer.

Interesting that they 'hide' behind the child's age to 'seal the records,' yet they throw out that he's able to sign a plea deal that many adults don't completely understand. :waitasec:

I personally believe they've put out enough into the public, to prove how badly they mishandled this case. There's probably even something in all this mess that can be used against the pros so that they COULD be required to reopen the records.

IF they have enough to convict the child, IF there's NO exculpatory evidence they've withheld from the def, those that believe the child guilty SHOULD have NO problem with opening the boy's records. After all, he's already plead guilty.

JMHO
fran