8-Year-Old Gave Conflicting Stories, But Ultimately Confessed In Video, Police Say
(CBS/AP) An 8-year-old boy accused in the shooting deaths of his father and another man said in a police interview released Tuesday that he did not fire the first shots at the men but later shot them so they wouldn't suffer. The boy gives conflicting accounts of the shootings during an hourlong video of his interview with authorities in St. Johns, but the video ends with him admitting to pulling the trigger. He then buries his head in his jacket. "I'm going to go to juvie," the boy says after an officer asks what he's thinking. The roughly 12-minute video posted Monday night on Phoenix television station KTVK's Web site shows part of the questioning the boy underwent as authorities in the eastern Arizona community of St. Johns investigated the Nov. 5 killings.
The station said it got the video from the prosecutor's office in Apache County, where the shootings occurred. "There was blood all over his face, I think," the boy said in the video, referring to his father. "And I think I touched him." The boy has been charged in juvenile court with two counts of murder in the deaths of his father, Vincent Romero, and Timothy Romans, who rented a room there and was Romero's co-worker.
A defense attorney has said police overreached in their questioning of the boy, who was not represented by a family member or lawyer during the interview. "I think they're going to have a problem getting that statement into court," defense attorney Benjamin Brewer said earlier this month before a judge issued a gag order in the case. "I believe there were many violations in regards to how it was obtained." The gag order does not extend to the release of reports or recordings that would be considered public records in Arizona. The shootings occurred Nov. 5 in an eastern Arizona community about 170 miles northeast of Phoenix. The boy is due in court Wednesday for a hearing. He is being held in a juvenile jail.
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
These murders occurred 11 months ago. What issues are raised in your minds regarding the questioning of this boy?
How reliable would an eight-year old be during the interview with police, given what he had just experienced?
What follow-up can you find regarding subsequent interviews with police, legal representation, others who might have been implicated/suspected in association with the murders?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I didn't know if we are supposed to comment on this one yet so I am anyways.
ReplyDeleteWell some issues I see are why was the interview released to the press. There should be no reason why they should have allowed the public to see this not only is this a juvinille case, but not interogations should be released to the press. It usually creates a bias amongst the citiizens in the community seeking a harsher punishment than need. Also why was there no one present with the child because one major thing the defense can use against the state is that he was scared of the police.
The child really could not be too reliable considering he just saw his father die. No matter how old someone is it is traumatizing to see your father die beofre your eyes. Not to mention the child could not make up his mind. It seems that the childs constitutional right may have been violated also. From the sound of this it seems like sloppy police work and justice being denied.
A follow-up I found was the boy plead guilty to the charges receving a deal from the state. the deal prevented him from serving time in a state facility. He will also go under some mental exams to see whats going on in his mind.
Daniel L.
Well the questioning wasn't legal considering there wasn't a parent's consent or a parent/lawyer present so the interview shouldn't be allowed as evidence.
ReplyDeleteAn 8 year old wouldn't be reliable at all because he would perceive the situation differently than it occured. His defense mechanisms could kick and and protect him from the things he saw or alter the memory so it was less trauma to take in.
Mitchell Anderson
Regarding the questioning of this boy, i believe there could be some issues. First off the boy is only 8 years old and this isnt the ordinary adult that is questioned everyday by these officers. The 8 year old should be questioned just the same way an adult would. An 8 year old could get tricked easily.
ReplyDeleteGreg Schaeffer
I would think an 8 year old would be more reliable than possibly an adult because the 8 year old might be scared to lie. In this case the 8 year old lied at the beggining of the interview but then confessed that he pulled the trigger. You never know how reliable people will be and it doesnt matter what age they are.
These murders occurred 11 months ago. What issues are raised in your minds regarding the questioning of this boy?
ReplyDeleteThe questioning involving the boy in my mind would not follow proceedures set by agency policy, due to the fact that the boy was questioned in a hostile environment without family representation. the only problem is that we dont know if the agency tried to contact his next to kin or another gaurdian. Another question that would be raised is that does the 8 year old child understand his "Miranda Rights?" Only knowing these facts I dont believe that the confession will be admissible in court.
His interview would be highly unrelieable due to the fact of his special circumstances!
The boy subsequently would plead guilty thus reducing the charges held against him.
Nathan Toole
I think the questioning of the boy was flawed because there was no parent/guardian there to supervise the child. He is only 8 years old so he is probably very confused and scared.
ReplyDeleteAgain, I don't think the 8 year old would be very reliable because I'm sure he is confused and very scared. He has probably never experienced anything near this tough and it is a lot to handle for someone so young.
Jeff Vaninger
You would think the authorities would have been smart enough to give the 8 year old the same opportunities as an adult. In handling him like that, it could be very detrimental on if his statement makes it into court or not. By not allowing the 8 year old a guardian or lawyer, the authorities helped the defense start their case.
ReplyDeleteJustin Brock
I disagree with how the boy was interviewed because I believe there should have been someone there with him whether it was a family memeber or a lawyer.
ReplyDeleteI think that an 8 year old under what he just exprienced isn't very reliable. He was probably confused, scared, and had no idea what was going on. On top of that the officers were probably scaring him the most asking him all the questions.
Nick Lantz
ReplyDeletewell the first thing that comes to my mind is he is EIGHT years old thats it eight thats young
ReplyDeletenot very reliable at all he is confused and full of all sorts of different things
Dillan york
If you question an 8 year old and expect him to answer alone your crazy. He needed someone in the room with im.
ReplyDeleteI think that the kid was helped out by not having someone because now the court will be more sympythetic towards him.
Justin Davis
I think the boy should have had someone with him while being questioned. Whether or not the boy actually did the crime, that would be a very stressful situation and he may have said something he wouldn't have depending on the officers' questioning. I can't imagine the boy could be calm and collected for that interview.... And because of that his answers can't really be taken as fact.
ReplyDeleteTom Weise
I am with everyone else on this. The 8 year old boy should have had adult supervision to say the least. Also, unless I misread, the prosecutors are thinking of prosecuting him as an adult. Wow, why? I dont remember being 8 years old and neither do they. He is a child. He made a huge mistake. He handled things just as they do in the video games that he plays and the shows that he most likely watches.
ReplyDeleteBut to answer the question regarding the reliability of the testimony is that it is going to be excluded from evidence. It wont fly in trial. He was interrogated without proper representation/supervision. He does not understand his rights. 8 year old do not say "I plead the 5th".
oops, sorry that last post at 9:01pm with the "I plead the 5th" comment was Jordan H.
ReplyDeleteHow reliable would an eight-year old be during the interview with police, given what he had just experienced?
ReplyDeleteI don't think he would be very reliable with what he had just experienced. I also think that he would be saying things that might not match up because he was so confused with the situation he was in.
Jake Miler
This is Justin Davis I'm not sure if you have been receiving any of my emails with my comments but i finally figured out why i couldn't post a comment. I just had to change my security settings...
ReplyDeleteSorry for the inconvenience,
Justin Davis
The eight year old boy shouldn't of had to answer the questions fromt the police by himself. It isn't fair and many times the police wouldn't even have tried this. This is why I think the interview shouldn't have any weight behind it.
ReplyDeleteBatman