Story about 8 year old boy who murdered his dad and another man gets more disturbing

[Uzybone]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/11/us/11child.html?hp


"An 8-year-old Arizona boy charged with premeditated murder in the deaths of his father and another man shot each victim at least four times with a .22-caliber rifle, methodically stopping and reloading as he killed them execution style, prosecutors said Monday."


"Prosecutors said the murder weapon was a single-action .22-caliber hunting rifle that requires reloading before each shot. “He had to eject the shell from the rifle and put in a new shell each time he fired,” Mr. Carlyon said."

[ZombieHorde]

1. Boys will be boys.

[codjh9]

36. Not funny whatsoever in this case.

[ZombieHorde]

177. Your probably right.

[Gormy Cuss]

2. Regardless, he's still a child.

Probably a deeply disturbed child, but a child.

[renie408]

113. Yeah, but I don't really want him playing with my kids. So, what do you do with him?

This is a seriously fucked up kid. I am not sure I buy that whole "he might not understand the finality of death" thing. This kid shot gophers or something with his father (which is a fucked up thing to do and might account for what happened). He should have had an idea of what dead was about.

[Gormy Cuss]

135. You evaluate him and place him in an appropriate care setting.

That may very well be a secure pediatric psych facility.

It is not clear that an 8 year old ever have sufficient understanding of death to be tried for murder. The age of reason is generally accepted as age 7 or so. Even understanding that animals die when you shoot them doesn't mean that he is capable of understanding the ramifications of killing a human.

[RollWithIt]

158. LOL, that's called JUVENILE PRISON...

MAX SECURITY.

[Gormy Cuss]

176. That's called juvenile all right. n/t

[babylonsister]

3. Hmmm. I wonder if he was abused.

I have no idea, just throwing it out there, because this sounds like a hate crime, and for that there might should be a reason. :shrug: Where was his mom?

OK, I'll read up on it. Now I'm curious.

[LisaL]

37. No evidence of abuse as of now.

"On the "Today" show, Melnick said there were no indications the boy had been in trouble before.

"There's no record of any problems in school, no reported abuse," he said.

Wood indicated to KPHO that he, too, had not heard any assertions the boy had been abused, despite media assertions that abuse could be related to a motive in the case.

"At this point in time, we haven't seen anything indicating abuse," Wood said. "We haven't heard of anything; we're not aware of anything.""




http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/11/10/child.charged.arizona.killing/index.html

[FedUpWithIt All]

155. Melnick is the police chief that allowed this child to be interrogated without representation.

Melnick should have had representation AND a professional who deals with children every time they talked with the boy.

Based on their pattern of dealing with the child I am suspicious when they suggest there is no evidence of abuse. Abuse does not always leave physical evidence and can be locked up very tightly in a young child. They need a capable child therapist to work with the kid.

[snake in the grass]

73. I think, by definition, a hate crime is something else...

...assuming he was abused. I would still like to wait, however, before speculating any further. This case is going to be followed very closely.

[gollygee]

84. It's possible he was abused by the mother rather than the father

That would explain why her rights were terminated, and it would explain why he is so apparently disturbed.

Who knows. It's all speculation at this point. It sounds to me like he needs to be in a psychiatric hospital until they figure out what's going on with him at least. Another article said no relatives wanted to take custody of him, so this might not be the first violent behavior on his part either.

[WindRiverMan]

175. Why the hell does it ALWAYS have to be the parent's fault?

I have three kids. Two are solid A and B students, play sports or involved in after school organizations, no problems in school, and are well liked by their teachers. The other one has had a rough time of it and cannot seem to learn without putting their hand in the fire to figure out it burns, and always has. I just think it is a difference in personalities which I attribute to genetics.

[gollygee]

178. It isn't necessarily

It's just speculation. I just read speculation that the father might be abusive, and my thought was that if someone was abusive it could have been the mother, since her rights were terminated. But it's also possible that no one was abusive to the child, or that someone else was. There are lots of possibilities.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

4. I can't believe it wasn't a scary looking assault rifle with a 30 round magazine.

[IndianaJones]

5. Whoever trained him did a good job. I've had raccoons walk away with 4 .22's in them. nt.

[TomInTib]

9. I know what you mean.

But I have come to the conclusion that 'coons are much tougher than humans.

I would be interested to see what the range between first and second shots were.

I'll bet the kid hit a torso shot and reloaded on the way, walking up to make a head shot.

Any way, that's my take on it.

Tom

[123infinity]

15. There are 22s and there are TWENTY TWOs...shorts will barely irritate a rabbit,

and long rifle cartridges can kill a fairly large mammal...a person even.

[IndianaJones]

18. I hunt with a 10/22. I wouldn't consider .22 LR a reliable kill for anything above a jackrabbit.

First shot placement on a person would have to be near perfect, hence my opinion that he was well trained.

[Papagoose]

145. Don't underestimate the .22

A family member accidentally shot and killed a man with a .22 LR. He was not a marksman, and was not aiming the weapon at the time of the shot, but the bullet did enough damage to cause death.

[IndianaJones]

149. I don't underestimate it. I use it for what it is best for. .17HMR for the raccoons. nt.

[NNN0LHI]

88. Wrong assumption friend

I used to know a big biker guy who was my cousin in-law. And when I say big I mean big. We used to call him Lerch he was so tall and big.

Someone he knew knocked on his front door one night and shot him one time in the chest with a .22 Short from a little bitty Saturday Night Special and killed him on the spot. He was dead before he hit the ground.

The autopsy showed the bullet bounced around inside of his chest off one bone or another like a pinball machine rather than passing through like a more powerful bullet might have. When the bullet finally stopped it had taken out every major organ in his chest. I was a pallbearer at his funeral.


Disinformation can be deadly.

Don

[123infinity]

171. Someone was lying to you. A .22 short doesn't have anywhere near enough kinetic energy

to "bounce around" inside a person's chest. That's just an incredibly goofy little story.
Sorry.

[slampoet]

89. I also recall something from hunter's safety, a .22 long centerfire can travel for up to 4 miles...

....if you are stupid and negligent enough to angle it upwards, something that hunter's safety was telling us never to do.



But that said and seeing the above comments i also should remind people that the .22 pistol is extremely deadly at close range. The mob for a long time used one shot against the head. The effect was more deadly with a small bullet bouncing around than a larger projectile which would go clean through.


Okay i am officially grossed out by this subject and my own post. i must read too many Mickey Spillane books.

[hfojvt]

126. Four!

Ha! Welcome to DU, Mr. Gamow.

[123infinity]

172. Thank you! We are all Hottentots in some way.

:D :rofl:

[LisaL]

38. According to the article I recently read, his father taught him how

to shoot.

[RebelOne]

86. And why were you shooting raccoons? Did you plan to eat them? n/t

[comtec]

100. you've never had a raccoon problem

after being humane, and trying to set things up so they'd loose interest, etc....and they STILL come back...
yeah you'd start shooting them too and making hats!
and I love furry animals...but I could have killed those bastards with my bare hands some nights.
raccoons are fascinating creatures.... in some one else's back yard!

[IndianaJones]

119. you should see what they do to chickens. it almost seems like they torture them for fun.nt.

[IndianaJones]

103. no. nt.

[RollWithIt]

144. Raccoons are the bastards of the animal kingdom...

Nasty animals. They are dirty, spread disease, and they're usually very aggressive.

[RedCappedBandit]

169. Sounds like humans

[comtec]

179. They're FASCINATING... totally like us

hell maybe we're looking at the wrong ancestors...
Raccoons will probably be the next species to evolve after we're gone - either we leave, or we're killed)

[TomInTib]

6. Snapped....

That is a seriously disturbing account.

Wrong place, wrong time.

[Sequoia]

115. Why does this remind me of the kid in "Halloween"?

[comanche12]

7. Whacking wildlife is a major factor here...

and of course the NYT doesn't get it.

[liberalmuse]

8. How can an 8 year old overcome two men?

While he shot one of the men and was reloading, why didn't the other guy take him down? This is a weird story. I just don't get how an 8 year old was able to do this to two grown men.

[Uzybone]

12. According to the cops

The 1st man was shot inside, while the 2nd man was talking on his cell phone outside. He probably had no idea that the kid was waiting to ambush him when he came in the house.

[Ex Lurker]

16. here's your answer

Mr. Romero, who was divorced from the boy’s mother, had recently remarried and had custody of his son. Mr. Romero was the first victim, investigators said, shot in the head and chest as he walked up a staircase inside the house shortly after 5 p.m.

Mr. Romans was outside the house talking on his cellphone to his wife, Mr. Carlyon said, when he heard some commotion inside. Mr. Carlyon said the rifle produced only a “muffled, soft popping” sound, making it likely that Mr. Romans had no idea what had happened inside. Mr. Carlyon said Mr. Romans had told his wife that the boy was calling for him. He was on the porch on his way into the house when he was shot in the chest and head, the authorities said.

[MadMaddie]

19. Oh boy, the boy was calling to him

that is not normal. The boy lured him into an ambush, damn...

[LisaL]

40. It's mind boggling. The kid is only 8.

[orleans]

54. sounds like a lot of the mystery might partially be explained by

mrs. Romans

[MadBadger]

10. And yet to me, the most disturbing thing is that the prosecution would try to charge him as an adult

[silverojo]

28. Kill like an adult, be tried like an adult

To paraphrase the old joke, you can't murder both your parents, then plead for clemency because you're an orphan.

[MadBadger]

30. He probably hasnt even gone through puberty yet. He isnt even halfway to becoming an adult

[Donald Ian Rankin]

80. This child is eight.

Trying him like an adult - or, indeed, trying him at all - would be evil. What is needed is treatment and support, not a criminal process.

He is *eight*.

[dana_b]

162. exactly. an 8 year old brain does not function

like an adult's brain. to try him like an adult would be criminal.

[FedUpWithIt All]

159. That is ridiculous. At eight he is supposed to have an adult like moral compass?

Surely you know that prosection as an adult is only viable if he has the ABILITY to realize, as an adult would, his actions. That is a huge request of an average 8 yr old. You yourself cannot see the difference between an elementary school child and an adult and that is with the benefit of several more years experience than this little boy has.

I wonder, would you be so quick to condemn an adult who is disabled and only has the mental age of an 8 year old?

[ColoradoMagician]

29. He is NOT being charged as an adult.

The police chief or sheriff was on the Today show this morning. He said the kid is being held in a juvenile detention center and that a juvenile judge would rule whether the kid could stand trial in a juvenile court.

[MadBadger]

31. I had heard differently on MSNBC today

THey were discussing multiple times about him being charged as an adult

[bunkerbuster1]

87. Thanks, that will teach me to believe/react to stuff without verifying first

I'd heard otherwise, here at DU. But I see from news accounts like, say, this...

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/national/southwest/view/2008_11_10_Top_cop_in_Arizona_slay_is_former_Ashland_chief/srvc=home&position=4

“This is unprecedented,” said Roy Melnick, who has been chief of police in St. Johns, Ariz., since April and before that spent six years as Ashland’s top cop. “It’s shocking to the residents.”

The boy is due in court today to face two counts of premeditated murder in the Wednesday shooting death of his 29-year-old dad and one of his dad’s co-workers. A judge will decide whether to try the child as an adult.

Melnick, in a phone interview with the Herald today, said trying the child as an adult is an option, but added: “I don’t think it’s an option we would explore.”

[valerief]

11. Well, it's a good thing Dad taught him how to use it.

How does a child get unsupervised access to bullets and a rifle? The supervised idiocy is bad enough.

Guess that moron father never watched Bowling for Columbine and never asked all the right questions.

[Name removed]

90. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[musette_sf]

13. is this a key to the "why"?

his parents are divorced.

the father got sole custody.

the mother is in Mississippi. not exactly close enough for visitation.

the father remarried.

the family is Roman Catholic.

although i do think that the possibility of abuse has to be considered, these things come to my mind when i think about the circumstances:

was the dad one of those so-called "father's rights" types, that will do anything to take the child away from the mother?

if he got sole custody, did he portray the mother as "unfit"? was this portrayal fair, or not?

if he remarried in the RCC, as i am assuming since the family is active in the church, did he get an annulment from the mother? or was he ever married to the mother? or was the marriage not in the Church, and therefore not considered as a "real" marriage?

i think that the boy has a pile of rage against his father. my gut feeling says that the father had very little regard for the mother, and the boy wanted to avenge his mother. i could be wrong but this is the vibe i get.

[fed_up_mother]

24. This sounds more like sociopathic behavior than rage

If the boy never formed good bonds - perhaps due to a bitter divorce, horrible circumstances, etc. - he could be a raging socipath by age eight.

And unfortunately, with sociopaths, his teachers might be none the wiser. All this is speculation, of course.

[old mark]

81. Speculation, but probably the only explanation. It's not only what he

"went through", but an existing problem exacerbated by circumstances.
The calmness and deliberation required to do this are indicative of a sociopath to me.


mark

[Hansel]

132. Sounds plausible.

The fact that the crime was premeditated and methodical, each victim was shot multiple times with each time requiring a reload, that he called the second victim into the house so he could execute him, and that he apparently pretended to find them all point to some pathology.

The fact that everyone claims that he wasn't a problem child either says that they had a high tolerance for misbehavior or that he was good at manipulating and disguising his behavior.

They claim he had no disciplinary problems, but also claim that his father spanked him the night before. I'm guessing that there were signs of pathology, however, the people surrounding him were not good at picking up on the cues. Probably had a "boys will be boys" mentality or blamed what he had been through with the divorce for his possible acting out so didn't see it as a problem.

Also, it's never a good idea to teach boys to kill animals just for the pleasure of killing them. Hunting for food is one thing. Killing for the sake of killing is something else. For this child it probably provided him with a sense of control in an out-of-control environment that divorce can create.
He just took it one step further. Calling the 2nd victim into the house instead of going outside to kill him seems to show a need for control.

Or not.

[TexasObserver]

25. You're worried the father is one of those "father's rights" guys?!

You're "feeling" all this because the father had sole custody?

How about a rational response to the facts? One parent got sole custody because the other parent was sorry, undependable, a danger to the child, and absent? That's usually why one parent gets sole custody. It's not because of "father's rights" advocates.

I have no doubt that the boy has rage, and some of it was or is directed at the father. Maybe the key is the mother, but perhaps you have idealized her as a victim, when she's the biggest perp. Where is she? Did she abandon him? Is she so sorry she deserved to have no custodial rights?

On the facts we know, there is no basis for thinking this guy is "one of those father's rights guys." Men who have sole custody of their children? "Lousy mothers" are the reason.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

121. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

125. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

128. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

129. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[madmom]

101. Not so, I know of 2 mothers in my town who gave up custody because they could

not afford to raise the kids. The fathers had good jobs, the mothers didn't ....go figure!

[Indenturedebtor]

64. I think the "why" has more to do with access to a gun

People snap sometimes. Even "well adjusted" people.

[Heidi]

74. Why do you use "father's rights" as a pejorative?

Father's _do_ have rights and they're entitled to those rights, and exercising those rights does not make them bad people, nor should it predispose them to an early death.

Navigating by vibe, huh? Oh, boy. Good luck with that.

The fact is, we don't _know_ what happened in this case. Hell, even the cops don't know exactly what happened; their investigation is ongoing.

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Heidi]

99. I don't guess I'd call another DUer a sexist moron,

but I do know that making assessments of one's parenting ability based solely on gender is extremely insensitive to the responsibile parents here of both genders, and far more biased than I'd want to be.

[Name removed]

123. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TexasObserver]

117. There's a strong implication that these "fathers" are up to no good.

When someone uses "father's rights groups" pejoratively, it typically means they are suggesting that those groups are one step removed from NAMBLA. I am not kidding. Those who attack "father's rights groups" typically accuse such men of using father's rights as a cover for sexually abusing their children.

There is an epidemic of false claims of sexual abuse against fathers in child custody cases. It is the hammer that a number of women use when they are in a custody battle, and it is, unfortunately, very effective in making the fathers play defense to prove their innocence.

[Iggo]

105. Wow.

That's a huuuuuuge stretch.

EDIT: Of course, way down thread I call the kid a psycho. So you're not the only one stretching, huh.

[NashVegas]

118. Absent of Information

We're all free to project, I guess. Some will have more plausible theories than others.


I think we can agree on the "rage" part.

[anigbrowl]

14. Yeah right

if reloading it was such a big production, how come when the first adult was shot the other didn't stop the kid? That's like saying shooting someone with a single-action gun is more cold-blooded than automatic because you have to pull the trigger every time.

Prosecutor sounds like a dick; a further example of why prosecutors should not be allowed to press their case in the media, but only during the actual trial. Aside of this case, I'm convinced that quite a few innocent Americans go to jail because they've been put through a perp walk, mugshots and public prosecution before they ever get to trial. God help you if you happen to be ugly. Most countries in Europe (where I come from) go to considerably lengths to safeguard the privacy of the accused until they've actually been convicted, and it disgusts me that the same isn't done here.

[Uzybone]

17. You might want to read the entire article first n/t

[jmowreader]

20. Not single-action, single-shot

Single action is like those old Wild West revolvers you have to cock between shots.

This gun had to be reloaded between shots--which takes time, and time gives you the opportunity to contemplate what the hell you're doing shooting a human being with a .22.

[anigbrowl]

21. I know what I wrote. It's called an analogy.

Meantime, I stand by my remarks, and think the prosecutor is an ass for the first order. Besides which, I think the trial as an adult thing is pointless. There appears to be little controversy about what happened; although the kid apparently wasn't read his rights correctly I'm guessing there's such abundant forensic evidence that the basic facts aren't in doubt.

Basically, the only reason to try him as an adult is that he could get a longer sentence, and the DA can leverage people's feelings of being freaked out to get a long sentence and use it as a selling point come election time. Saying you had the kid put into a youth treatment program isn't as impressive as saying you got him locked up for life or some shit.

[NickB79]

42. Because the other guy was outside on the phone, and .22's are pretty quiet guns

The other guy just heard some popping sounds from inside the house as the kid finished off his father.

Then the guy went into the house after the boy called for him to come inside :scared:

[TexasObserver]

22. Yeah, this is beginning to look like one very disturbed kid.

Unless there is evidence that he was molested by both men, this sounds like a kid who decided to kill his father because he wasn't happy about being unable to see his mother. Not sure why he would think he should kill the roomer, too.

The fact that he had to reload repeatedly and shoot each one repeatedly suggests the kid is not ever going to be safe for the general population. The fact that he ambushed the roomer after killing his father adds to the macabe nature that the kid must have.

The father may be guilty of nothing, or he may be guilty of being an overbearing father, or he may be guilty of abusing the child. So far, he looks guilty of getting sole custody of the child. Since that isn't often granted unless there's compelling evidence to deprive one parent of any custody. Perhaps his mother has problems that have yet to be disclosed. If she didn't have any custody rights, it's a fairly safe bet YOU wouldn't want to leave your kids with her.

[musette_sf]

23. not necessarily

if the dad has enough money, enough power, and enough powerful friends, he can get sole custody whether the mother was really "unfit"... OR NOT. there are many family court horror stories where a mom with no money, no power, and no powerful friends has her children torn from her solely because the dad could do it.

of course, the mom could be a terrible unfit parent and could be part of why the boy is so maladjusted.

but just saying that sole custody does NOT automatically mean that the non-custodial parent is unfit.

[TexasObserver]

27. You're projecting with all that nonsense.

Sole custody almost always means one parent is really sorry, the one denied custodial rights. Often, such a parent has abandoned the duties of parenting entirely. Most of the time, it's the man who abandons the duty to the child, but in at least 15% of the cases, it is the mother.

Blaming every bad situation on the father means you're probably projecting your own personal fears and biases upon this situation. There is such a thing as speculating based upon the facts, and speculating based upon one's own fears. You're not doing the former. There are no facts upon which to base such a supposition.

[liberalhistorian]

51. BULLSHIT.

I've been in the legal field for years and I've seen firsthand that men with power and money can get sole custody with very little, if any, evidence of "unfitness" on the part of the mother. That is a bullshit myth that if you have sole custody it's because something is really wrong with the other parent. It would be nice if things worked that way in the real world instead of the lofty ideal world of "justice", but it just doesn't. I've seen more than enough grossly unfair custody decisions to make me physically ill for a lifetime. It often has nothing to do with the "fitness" of a parent. It has to do with who has the more money and power. Period.

[TexasObserver]

55. Your comments are complete fabrications.

I'm been an attorney for over thirty years, so sell that nonsense to someone else.


All you're doing is projecting your own bias onto the world and seeing what you want to see.


Now, which courts are you licensed in?

[liberalhistorian]

57. I think you're the one who's projecting.

As far as "bias?" I don't have a "bias" as to whether men or women would be better parents and which ones should automatically get custody. But I have seen more than enough times a parent lose custody simply because they didn't have the same deep pockets that the other parent did. I saw it often in legal services. Men get screwed on that just as women do. And I've seen some nutty judges, as well. Judges don't always make the correct decisions based on the facts before them. I would think you'd know that as an attorney.

I'm a paralegal and my husband is an attorney.

[TexasObserver]

58. You assist your husband around the office.

Got it.

The system is imperfect, but it favors joint custody unless there are compelling reasons not to have joint custody. The most common reason for sole custody is abandonment by the other parent. The second most common reason is often connected to the first - out of control drinking or drugging by the parent who has no custodial rights.

Your comments do a gross disservice to the entire system. People who lose their parental rights usually earned that status, it wasn't stolen.

[Pastiche423]

67. You are wrong!

It happened to me.

It's simple. He had money. I did not. He wanted to punish me for divorcing him. Over the years, he tried in many, varid ways to hurt me. Then it occurred to him there was one thing he could take from me that would crush me, my daughter.

He had wealthy parents, as did his second wife. I was a single, working mom that did not receieve child support. (I mistakenly thought that if I din't ask for any, then he would leave me alone.)

He took me to court w/his highly paid attorney. I could not afford represenation.

On July 14, 1993, he took my daughter. I have not since her since. On that day, he cut a huge hole in my heart that will never close.

So, don't you dare imply I was unfit! You are talking out of your ass. And it is not appreciated.

Btw, how many states are you registered to practice law?

[TexasObserver]

69. I have no way of knowing the other side of that matter.

But I'm sure it varies greatly with your version.

If your story is true, and I'm not granting that it is, it's the exception, not the rule.

The ORDER denying custodial rights states the reason for such denial of rights. I don't find any mention of that stated reason in your post. Perhaps you're leaving something out.

Whatever the reason for the denial of your custodial rights, that's a terrible loss to you. Has your daughter ever attempted to contact you? Or you contact her? In the world of myspace and face book and google, I'd think you might be able to find quite a bit on her.

[Pastiche423]

70. How many states can you legally practice law?

[TexasObserver]

71. Nope, not gonna play that.

I'm licensed in state and federal courts, and have been continuously over 30 years.

That's all you need to know about my bar status.

[Pastiche423]

72. Every state has their own laws

There is no way possible that you could know the law in each and every state. Therefore, you are pulling "statical" crap out of the air.

Your chickenshit respose has been noted.

[musette_sf]

164. thank you

for speaking Truth to Defensiveness.

[PassingFair]

91. Who are YOU, the Dr. Frist of the legal world?

You're coming off like a first class jerk.

YOU are the one who is "projecting" here.

[liberalhistorian]

108. Oh, believe me, I've known more than

a few arrogant SOB attorneys like that. And I now avoid them like the plague.

Anyone who spends ten minutes working in the legal field and in the courts would know that there are plenty of times when justice does NOT prevail, no matter the facts or lofty pronouncements otherwise, and money has a helluva lot more to do with it than people would ever like to think. Any attorney who doesn't acknowledge that has his head up his ass, or only cares about dollar signs. I've had the misfortune of knowing some of those, also.

[sweetpotato]

98. I am trained and have worked as a paralegal

Indicating that you "got it" because the poster "assists your (her) husband around the office" is a bit condescending and dismissive.

[liberalhistorian]

107. Nice assumption. You know what they say

about those. Actually, no, I work separately from him. I've been a paralegal for fourteen years and am now considering law school. Part of those years included time in legal services, where I saw first-hand parents losing custody for no other reason than that they didn't have the deep pockets and power of the other parent. And I've been in other jobs where that's happened as well. I've seen perfectly good parents lose custody for no other reason than that they didn't have the money or power to fight it.

There is even a piece circulating on the internet and IRL called "How to Get Custody and Make the Bitch Pay Child Support." It's a truly disgusting piece of filth. It lists all kinds of shit to complain about then goes about describing how they can manipulate things against the mother, etc. Truly sick. Never mind that they'll pay a lot more taking care of the kid every day than they ever would in child support.

[onefreespiritedchick]

61. Here is another article on this matter

Interesting...

http://www.abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/WireStory?id=6214583&page=1

[TexasObserver]

62. Wow. Some interesting info in that.

"At St. John the Baptist, Romero sang in the choir and his wife had also signed up. The couple spent two years preparing for marriage, and when they tied the knot in September the "church was packed," Sauter said.

"Because both their parents were divorced, they wanted to make sure their marriage lasted until death, and it did," Sauter said.

Romero had full custody of the 8-year-old boy and the marriage made Tiffany Romero his stepmother. The boy's mother had visited St. Johns from Mississippi last weekend and returned to Arizona after the shootings that took place Wednesday, said Apache County Attorney Brad Carlyon."

--------------

Those facts suggest the mother's visit to see the boy may have been some kind of catalyst for his actions. Maybe he saw it as a way to join her and leave his father and his step mother.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

95. Bullshit.

If you've been in the legal field for years, then you've undoubtedly seen a thousand times more cases where the WOMAN aggressively fights to have the rights taken away from the father and wins with very little, since the courts are slanted towards the mother a thousand fold. And it doesn't even take them money nor power to do it. Just making up a bunch of shit and decimating the father's character unfairly is enough.

[TexasObserver]

110. Yes. The deck is stacked heavily in favor of mothers.

It's practically routine for mothers to claim the father abused the children, so routine that judges in custody cases have grown weary of hearing them from virtually every mother who engages in a custody fight with her husband.

When the father gets custody, it's unusual. When the father gets custody and the mother gets no custodial rights, it is usually because the mother is an active alcohol or addict who has left the home and abandoned the children. THAT is the reality.

The occasional "rich, mean husband" who games the system happens, but that's mainly "made for TV movie" stuff. With few exceptions, people who lose their custodial rights proved by their own conduct they were a danger to their own children, someone who could not be trusted.

I'm sure there are exceptions, but that doesn't change the norm.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

124. You seem bitter, OMC. nt

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

127. The Disgustingly Unfair Treatment Of Fathers By The Courts Is Something That Should Make Everyone

bitter.

Thankfully, much progress has been made, and hopefully much more progress will be made.

[musette_sf]

163. thank you

for speaking Truth To Defensiveness.

[Midlodemocrat]

79. Absolutely and unequivocally untrue.

[TexasObserver]

111. Of course it is.

I speak from knowledge. You don't.

[Midlodemocrat]

131. Right. Because I never testified on behalf of any of my clients

in family court. Or offered professional opinions on it.

You fail.

[TexasObserver]

133. pfffft.

I've noted your lack of honesty and factual accuracy many times here.

I don't believe anything you say.

Too bad I cannot cross examine you under oath, so we'd find out what you know and what you only think you know.

[Midlodemocrat]

134. LOL. That's rich, dude. Hilarious in fact.

I believe quite a few people in this thread have said the same about you.

[TZ]

140. Link? Proof? If you are gonna call someone a liar you better

damn well back yourself up or you will be written off as just a sourpuss who lost an argument with someone. Then again, you may be.
Its my personal observation that name calling is the last refuge of the incompetent.

[TexasObserver]

170. Let me guess. You're doing OUTRAGE.

hahaha

thanks for sharing

[nini]

34. ANYONE who can kill like that is 'disturbed' regardless of everything else

He's a cold blooded killer and his age shouldn't make it any less than what it is.

[TexasObserver]

63. I agree. He clearly developed a plan and carried it, executing both men.

It was cold blooded. Even if "he had a good reason," his action reveals a sociopath, in all likelihood.

[LisaL]

53. The guy worked for the construction company and rented

a room in his house to someone.
Does that sound to you like someone with lots of money, power and powerful friends?

[TexasObserver]

56. Hey, don't get in the way of a projected delusion!!

These situations always bring out a host of those who see in the father evil that usually isn't there. He becomes a caricature of all the features a bad father might have, all because he's the father and fathers are bad, they're BAD!!

[LanternWaste]

82. Six of one, half a dozen of the other...

"These situations always bring out a host of those who..."


And they also seem to bring out the fathers' righteous defenders, attempting to shield him from prognostications, presumptions, and other opinions.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other...

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

94. What A Crock Of Shit. The Courts Are Slanted Ten Fold Towards The Mother. The Horror Stories Are

the opposite. A thousand times more horror stories could be told of women who vilify their spouses and take advantage of the highly slanted and bullshit court system to take the kids away from the father. Claiming it is the men who abuse the system and the women who are the victims is ridiculous.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

156. I agree with you there, 100%.

[Hepburn]

102. Not true....

...children in custody battles are given their own court appointed attorneys to protect their rights. At least this is true in Calif. If the mother was a better parent, trust me, the child's atty would have advocated for her no matter who had the bucks or who rep'd the father.

I was an atty for a very long time and my area of practice was primarily child custody litigation.

[TexasObserver]

114. Thank you for speaking up about your significant experience in child custody.

I hadn't even mentioned the Guardians Ad Litem who come into play.

For the past 20 years in America, there has been a mandate for Joint Custody in America in most states. It is statutorily stated as the preferred custody arrangement. It is the default. Any party who wants more than that has to prove the other side is not trustworthy.

Admittedly, our system favors those with money, and that's unfortunate.

[Pastiche423]

173. That is a load of crap

Children are NOT always given their own court appointed attorneys. I begged and pleaded for one and was told I'd get one before the date of the hearing. I called every day - no one had been assigned - yet.

On the day of the hearing in the judge's chambers, I had no representation, nor did my daughter. These broad brush generalizations you and that other arrogant poster are making help no one, while deeply hurting others.

How fucking dare you say what you did as fact! This happened in California fifteen and a half years ago. The same state you claim you practiced in.

I want an apology from you. I want you to tell everyone reading this that you only experienced what you did in your practice - not the real reality of what happens to poor mothers in this country evey fucking day!

:grr:

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TexasObserver]

112. Well said. Fathers are held to a much, much higher standard.

That's the simple truth. Mothers are ASSUMED to be necessary, while men are assumed to be demons, and the burden of proof is on the man in both instances to prove those presumptions are wrong.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

157. Yep. Fathers are too often treated like shit in custody battles.

To be fair, if my parents had divorced when I was a child, I would have chosen my mom.

But fathers get the shaft far too often in custody battles.

[Kali]

26. this is such a weird story

couple items bug me: boy being that good of a shot with a 22 (not to mention SO young for this kind of thing), guy renting at the home yet was talking to his wife on cell phone - huh?, and boy did say he was spanked for school related reasons so the bit about no indication of trouble sounds wrong

and just for tinfoil reasons: Roman and Romero?

[LisaL]

41. His father taught him how to shoot.

Why the guy was renting a room when he had a wife-well could be they are separated (not that unusual). The father has recently remarried.

[Kali]

143. big dif between knowing how to shoot and killing two men.

even with plenty of practice and animal kills a human is a large animal. Two with what sounds like 4 shots, 3 of which had to be reloaded is pretty remarkable.

[arcadian]

32. How was he able to shoot two victims when he had to reload?

One guy could have gotten away. Not making sense.

[LisaL]

39. They are both dead, aren't they?

One victim was found just outside the front door, and the other victim was found in upstairs room. So, whoever shot them (allegedly the kid), could have shot the victim in upstairs room first, and then the second victim as the victim was coming into the house. Or the victim found by the front door could have been shot as he was trying to get away.

[NickB79]

44. .22's are not loud guns to fire. Here is the quote from the article

"Mr. Romans was outside the house talking on his cellphone to his wife, Mr. Carlyon said, when he heard some commotion inside. Mr. Carlyon said the rifle produced only a “muffled, soft popping” sound, making it likely that Mr. Romans had no idea what had happened inside. Mr. Carlyon said Mr. Romans had told his wife that the boy was calling for him. He was on the porch on his way into the house when he was shot in the chest and head, the authorities said."

The guy didn't even realize he was hearing gunshots.

[dysfunctional press]

83. victim 1- father inside the house- shot in the head, reload, shot in the chest...

the second victim was outside on his cellphone during the first killing- the lil' psycho called him into the house and proceeded to shoot him in the head as well...reload, and put one in the chest.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

96. Makes Perfect Sense. Reading The Article Is A Huge Help.

Course, if one were to make statements and try and draw conclusions from inside a narrow mental bubble while in the absence of the facts and details that actually surrounded the situation, then I guess maybe it would seem probable that they would deem it as not making sense.

[arcadian]

148. Out smarted by an 8 year old?

In your case I see how that's possible, but the rest of us adults surely would not have fallen for that.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

174. He Woulda Shot You So Quick It Ain't Even Funny.

You look like a fool by holding onto your argument. Read the article, since you still appear to be discussing this from a level of ignorance to the details.

[Art_from_Ark]

33. So many possibilities

Another article says that the men in the family were "avid hunters", and that they would take target practice on little critters like prairie dogs. The father forced the son to learn to shoot a gun at a very tender age, maybe even forced him to shoot cute critters, and that could have traumatized the kid. If the father had kept that up, the kid could have rebelled violently. Maybe the father dragged the kid away from Mississippi to Hell Hole, Arizona, and the kid couldn't adapt to a completely different environment and went bonkers. Maybe the kid was abused by the two men. Who knows?

[liberalhistorian]

52. That kind of "teaching" could have easily

traumatized and then desensitized him at an age when that shouldn' have been happening at all. That is child abuse, as far as I'm concerned.

[jeepnstein]

85. I learned to shoot at that age.

It was just part of growing up. Of course, it was also highly structured and "my" rifle was kept with the others. Ammo was tightly controlled and stored separately. I wasn't allowed to shoot on my own until I was something like twelve or thirteen. As a result, I've never really viewed guns as anything other than incredibly dangerous tools that require strict adherence to all the safety rules. The biggest rule was "You killed it so now you're going to eat it". That really takes the fun out of taking random shots at the local wildlife.

The eight year old in this case must have had something serious going on. I've never met a murderer yet that didn't have a "valid" reason for what they did. They're fascinating people to spend some time with. Of course, their thinking is seriously flawed but they can pretty well tell you exactly why they did it. Here's a hint, "I just snapped" is a cop-out they use to avoid the death penalty.

[hexola]

35. Anyway we can keep ads for GUNS appearing with this thread...(besides donating to DU!)

Pretty tasteless...I know it's not DU's fault. Still pretty lame.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

43. What's wrong with gun ads?

[LisaL]

45. Well, as we are talking about 8 year old boy allegedly killing

2 people, do you really have to ask?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

46. So you think that gun ads on DU are contributing to 8 year olds committing murder?

[LisaL]

49. No.

I personally don't want to see ads for guns when I am discussing an 8 year old child allegedly committing murder.
But hey, whatever floats your boat.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

50. I've worked dozens of fatal car wrecks and car ads never seem to bother me.

I'm not following your logic.

David

[hexola]

77. So you think...? A classic...(nt)

[hexola]

78. Is there something you dont understand about the word "tasteless?"

Words mean things.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

167. Is there something you don't understand....? A classic...(n/t)

[ContinentalOp]

47. Ha!

Gun ads don't kill people. People clicking on gun ads with their itchy trigger fingers kill people. :eyes:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

48. Or at least kills peoples sensibilities.

[McCamy Taylor]

59. Where can an 8 year old be tried as an adult? No where. Brain is too immature.

An 8 year old would not even necessarily understand that death is final. At 8, death might still be too abstract for him to connect shooting the two men with them never waking up. So, for instance, in his mind, it could have been more like a video game.

http://www.nasponline.org/resources/crisis_safety/griefwar.pdf

See the part where it talks about how kids may be as old as nine before they finally begin to understand what death really means.

An act can be premeditated and yet the child may not have understood its significance.

[mondo joe]

60. Agreed. The entire point of minor status is that children don't have adult capacity

in making choices.

[puerco-bellies]

65. There was no rage in this. Rage is not methodical.

One shot to the body, and one to the head. That is sound technique for killing a human. The body is a high percentage shot, to stop or disable. The head shot is for the kill. As to a .22 being too small a caliber, bullshit. I got hit with a long rifle an inch above and to the left of my belly button when I was 15. After being hit I did not drop, but I sure as hell was not moving fast. The only reason I lived is that the asshole who shot me missed the next shot.

There is no easy answer on what to do with this kid. If he is tried as a juvenile he is out at 18 to 21 years of age. It is almost certain that he will be institutionalized, and likely already a sociopath. I don't care how much empathy you have for this kid, would you be comfortable with him moving next to door after his release? If he is tried as an adult he will be incarcerated for most if not all of his life, what a wasted life, what a tragedy.

[jrockford]

66. the kid called the 2nd adult into the house for an ambush...

That bothers the *hell* out of me.

[Rebubula]

109. Bad seed

Though I have big problems with the thought of trying this kid as an adult - I do think that he needs to be segregated from society (assuming the official ambush story is accurate) for the rest of his life.

Some people are born bad. Some are made bad. The end result for the rest of us is the same - a dangerous predator roaming the streets with homicidal tendencies and little or no moral bearing.

I do not support capital punishment, but I support separating the monsters (wish we could do this for the current Administration) from normal society.

[TexasObserver]

116. "Some people are born bad. Some are made bad."

Sadly, your statement is correct.

The "born" sociopath is largely inexplicable.

[NashVegas]

122. Abused People Can Disassociate Their Emotions From Their Operations *Really* Well

I've seen nothing that offers evidence this kid was abused, however.

[Midlodemocrat]

136. I've seen or read nothing that offers any insight into this child's state of mind.

I almost wonder if they're not releasing any findings on purpose, or are having trouble reaching clinicians to agree on a dx.

[NashVegas]

137. I Just Saw There's a Gag Order

We aren't likely to get those details anytime soon.

I came across this quote:

"Relatives and friends painted a picture of Romero as a caring father who seemed to be doing all he could to raise a polite and respectful boy."

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iG_nB7rdOr3TiaL5ph3YDR5qNNTAD94CLQA80

Nothing wrong with that, but it screams of something that "happy and healthy" doesn't.

[Midlodemocrat]

139. Oh, thanks. Missed that.

It's very troubling, isn't it? How a child of 8, which is barely the 'age of reason' could commit such a heinous crime.

Whatever the outcome, I hope he gets the help that he needs, but I have my doubts. Most patients I had that were part of the criminal justice system were pretty far down on the totem pole in terms of the care they received. A child this young is likely to be over medicated to keep him from acting out because staffing is often a problem.

Speaking just from my experience, because I don't know the laws in that state.

[Kali]

150. Midlo, a little off topic

but that ROFL smiley sure is jarring when you post in serious threads. Probably just the way my addled brain processes images, but:o

[Midlodemocrat]

151. LOL. You aren't the first one to say that. I should probably

remove it, now that Ms. Palin is irrelevant.

:hi:

[Politicalboi]

68. Maybe like the posts before

That they made him kill and maybe he didn't want too. Or maybe his mother tricked him into doing this. Is there a life insurance policy?

[KillCapitalism]

75. It's too bad our justice system is not more like Iran's.

This kid would most likely get the death penalty over there. OK, maybe that's a bit harsh, but hopefully he will be locked up in a supermax facility for the rest of his life. This kid is likely a dangerous predator and a violent sociopath. If he ever gets released into society, he WILL kill again. Keeping him locked away will save lives.

[TWiley]

76. Wow, Guns really kept that family safe

[gorbal]

97. I have this weird feeling the kid is innocent

There is just something suspicious about how the police were acting and the kid's personality.

And if he did do it..... I remember being 8, your conscience is messed up, not really formed yet. 8 year olds will do things they would never dream of 10 years later. Abuse or not this is not an adult we are talking about here.

[Iggo]

104. 8 yrs old or 18 or 80.

That dude's a fuckin psycho.

The term "nip it in the bud" comes to mind.

[amber_86]

120. one question why was the second guy living there when he has a

wife. Maybe the boy saw his father and the other guy doing something together and thought that is wrong. Or maybe he was abuse, but when kids are being abuse they act up in school and stay to themself. He probably was getting pick on at school because there was another man living there. Well something happen in that house.

[AlCzervik]

130. maybe they were having money problems and needed the rental income.

[gollygee]

138. Or maybe the other guy lost his job and needed a place to live for a while?

We're moving from "speculation" to "wild speculation" at this point.

[AlCzervik]

141. no kidding.

[Midlodemocrat]

142. It's such a horrific story. I keep picturing 'Michael Myers' from the

original Halloween in my head. :cry:

[AlCzervik]

146. i'm sure in the coming weeks we'll find out what if anything was going on at that house.

maybe he's wired wrong or maybe something had been happening to him in terms of abuse. It's just hard to wrap your head around this crime.

[Midlodemocrat]

147. You aren't kidding. I treated some seriously ill children

and teens for many years, but I have never seen anything like this. Particularly chilling is the part where he apparently 'called them outside' to ambush them. Horrifying.

I feel terrible for everyone involved, but mostly for his mother. Whatever the reasons are that she didn't have custody, I am sure she is beside herself with regret. Well, not 'sure', but you know what I mean.

[AlCzervik]

152. My nephew Matthew had a best friend and his parents were both child psychiatrists

anyhow his best friend killed himself when he was 13, it was a shock obviously but he was also the youngest person i've ever known that has committed suicide. As for his parents, his mom was almost catatonic and his dad ended up giving up his practice. I'm not sure where they are now because it was about 15 years ago but my god he was so young, i still have a hard time believing it toady.

[Midlodemocrat]

153. My biggest heartache, professionally, came from the suicide of

a boy whose entire family I just adored. I taught him and his brothers while I was going to graduate school.

He had been in rehab for cocaine addiction, returned and came to see me during school. He looked wonderful. Seemed happy, seemed glad to be home, but it was a very quick conversation between classes.

He hanged himself later that night when an old 'friend' came over with come cocaine and he couldn't refuse it. I guess he was just so ashamed. He was 15.

The funeral was unreal. They were Irish and his name was Danny. (Ironically, he had the same last name as my married name. How weird is that?)

They played Danny Boy on the bagpipes and I thought I was going to vomit.

I'll never forget it. And, hearing that song never ceases to bring me to tears for that wonderful life cut so short.

[AlCzervik]

154. That's how Simon also killed himself, he used a belt.

and i won't get into it up but there was a lot of speculation, "was an accident?".

[Midlodemocrat]

165. I know what you mean. This definitely was no accident.

Used a rope and hanged himself from the cellar rafter.

One of his younger brothers found him. :cry:

[AlCzervik]

166. What a terrible tragedy, that brother will always have that imprinted on his brain.

Simon was also in the cellar but it was the housekeeper that found him. When i was at the wake i heard some of the people there speculation on the whole "Accident?" or suicide, i think you can guess what they thought he was doing that would have made it an accident, i was fucking horrified but what i heard and i did talk to that group, they shut up fast but i'm sure they went home and discussed it.

[Seedersandleechers]

160. The UK movie, "Boy A" is about a child murderer who gets

released after many years. I believe it was based on a true story.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1078188/

[musette_sf]

161. obviously there are still a lot of people

who think that the family courts are all on the side of the mother.

this is NOT true in many cases. those of who who said i was "full of sh!t" needs to do some homework before shouting an untruth.

and both of my posts where a lot of knee-jerking ensued, clearly stated that there WAS a possibility that the mother was an unfit mother. i felt it important to discuss the OTHER possibility, that the father had unfairly taken away parental rights from the mother. i asked, "was it fair, or not". i said "of course, the mom could be a terrible unfit parent".

i gave my gut feeling in my posts. again, i also stated quite clearly that i could be wrong.

as for those of you who accused me of projection, for the record i have no children and have never been personally involved in a custody battle. so you who accused me of projecting are WRONG. and nasty too.

that being said, the responses to my posts proves that there is a lot of defensiveness and projection around the idea that MAYBE a man has the power and wherewithal to screw a woman out of rights to see and be with her child.

[Midlodemocrat]

168. There are many reasons that people get sole custody.

One parent being 'unfit' is just one of them. The comments above are ridiculously harsh in their assessment that this child's mother was 'unfit'. There is nothing to suggest that she is.

Obviously, the courts for years have given custody to the mother based on numerous factors. Economics is just one. In latter years, there has been a concerted effort on behalf of the psychological community to put the welfare of the child first, regardless of the gender of the primary custody holder.

Ask any guardian ad litem or CASA volunteer, (of which I am one)