8-Year-Old Confesses To Shooting Dad

Ariz. Boy Charged With Murder Gave Conflicting Stories, But Ultimately Confessed In Video, Police Say

(CBS/AP)  An 8-year-old boy accused of killing his father and another man is due in court Wednesday a day after prosecutors released a police interview with the boy in which he admits to firing at least two shots at each man.

The Arizona boy said 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."

Citing the boy's age and the sketchy circumstances surrounding the case, CBS News chief legal analyst Andrew Cohen said, this ranks as "one of the most egregious examples of pretrial publicity."

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.

[fush2]

his a minor y wasnt there any family member with him...they should dismiss this video....i mean really..i dont see how an 8 year old can pick up a gun and kill his own dad..they need to do more investigating...

[lavay1]

I viewed the video of the 8 yr old boy being interrogated. You have got to be kidding me that they believe that this is a case that is on the up and up. This is a child that was taught by his father on how to handle a gun and was probably told that animals are not to suffer upon being shot. This young child does not know nor does he understand the meaning behind what these police officers were trying to get him to say. He was most definitely cohersed into making the statements that he made. This is a case that should go no further but to release him to his mother and call it done. I''m not an advocate to fire arms but this child did not kill his father nor the other man. As he stated he came upon these men already shot and me may have used the gun to end the suffering as he was taught by his father but he clearly does not appear to understand what has taken place here and the authorities should be heavily reprimanded for their actions of putting this child into this situatiion (*** them).

[lucidreams]

Okay, natali14 is right. We are starting to go off of the subject at hand. Truthrocks is right about the numbers he/she posts. On one last point about the ammendments, however, the right to bear arms is a protection clause. I understand that some people don''t have the right mindset to grasp this concept, but I feel safe knowing that i can defend myself with such force if I have to. The first ammendment grants the right to free speech, but you can''t yell "fire!" in a crowded theatre. If guns are outlawed, shooting people in the face will still be illegal. It''s the immorality that causes these deaths, not the rights we''ve been granted as citizens of the United States. Anyway, this issue really is about the kid''s rights. I don''t know what the hell to hope for in this case.

[natali14-2009]

I think that the issue is clouded here. The question is not about whether or not an individual should have the right to own a gun...the issue is where exactly are the CHILD''S rights? We should be focusing moreso on how faulty this interrogation was held. I will be very dissappointed if this child is convicted on these murders based on a pressured confession drawn by the officers questioning him. If this child goes to jail you might as well consider him a convict for life, because that is exactly the lifestyle he will be taught within that type of environment.

[lucidreams]

The second ammendment gives us the right to own guns LEGALLY. An eight-year-old boy cannot have a gun registered to him. Also, the kid was old enough to know how to dial 911. If he truly came in with two dying men in his house, why would he shoot them to put them out of misery instead of notifying someone? I''m not saying he murdered these guys in cold blood, but I''m presenting alternatives to icing your dad. If an eight-year-old knows how to load and fire a rifle, it doesn''t necessarily mean that he''s responsible enough to be given that liberty.

[pensacola98]

Children that kill are not as rare as many believe.

Many children exposed to anger become violent and kill.

There is no vehicle to identify high risk children and intervene, because social workers are hired to address matters after violent actions occured, not before.

A person is required to have a license before driving a car, flying an airplane, or owning a buisiness, but no license is required to have a child.

[shanev137]

I just read the boy is going to be set free and allowed to spend the holidays with his mother.

Aren''t they afraid he might kill her as well?

[cockamammy]

rem rafdn - If you are protecting yourself or your family from an intruder you have every right to protect yourself. With that in mind you should do everything you can to avoid killing. But shooting 2 people over a TV is murder, no matter what. What this scumbag did was unnecessary. What most disgusts me is the value he places on an appliance over a human life with no remorse or sadness. I don''t think there is anything more unchristian or immoral for that matter than feeling good about murdering someone else.

[shanev137]

"I think I shot my dad" ????

[cockamammy]

Ok - After reading through most of these postings I noticed that only 1 of you folks brought up the idea of a gag order. This is a sensationalist crime and considering it in involves a child, there should be a complete blackout or information relating to this horrible event. Where is the judge in this whole thing!? What hell are the police and prosecutors thinking by releasing this video confession!? By showing this tragic interrogation, they are satisfying the perversion of the people who get off watching sad and sick stuff like this - like some of the people in this forum. Showing this video doesn''t help law enforcement, the prosecution, or anybody for that matter.
PS - getoffmine1, you are a true lowlife if you feel proud for killing 2 people. The fact that you cared more about your junk TV than the lives of 2 people shows exactly who you are - a shameless, lowlife murderer.

[perk235]

It is extremely common for adults to confess to crimes they didn''''t commit under interrogation, and I suspect it is even more likely with an 8 year-old.
Posted by cneron at 03:54 PM : Nov 19, 2008
----------------
Yes, 6 people have been released from 20 years in prison in Nebraska. Five of them confessed to a crime they didn''t commit. DNA evidence has shown there was 1 killer and he died a number of years ago.

Five adults confessed to a crime they didn''t commit. No wonder there are special rules for children.

[earache4]

....Well now he won''t get any allowance at all.....

[CarolJWright]

When the boy said he thought his father was suffering, so he shot him, perhaps the kid meant that he saw his father was shot and suffering, so he put him out of his misery.

[missouri-dad]

I suspect the prosecutor knows that the confession won''t be admitted as evidence, so he''s just punting for public opinion

[kjost21]

But in any event, there''''s no parallel with gun violence. No guns = no gun violence. Period.





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

Posted by cdfoxtrot5 at 04:43 PM : Nov 19, 2008

No alcohol means no alcohol related deaths, period. No smoking equals no smoking related deaths, period.

Many people use guns for recreation such as hunting. People don''t just get guns to kill people. Hunting may not be an activity that you do, but don''t infringe upon the freedom of others to do so.

From your argument, you do not seem to be concerned with the number of people injured or killed by any means, but only by the fact that guns should be banned.

[dragyn30]

Police in general do not have any regards for a child''s rights. They play the "hey, I''m your friend" act and then they are allow to press ridiculous charges against a kid who answered questions without a lawyer or a parent with him - how the court can allow that to be admitted into evidence is beyond me.

I have absolutely no respect for cops that get away with these actions against kids! They should be charged with child endangerment, no good came out of releasing this poor kid''s alleged confession.

[kjost21]

Outlawing guns will not solve the problem. It may lessen the number of gun deaths, but where do you draw the line at appropriate levels? Cigarettes kill people with cancer and accidental fires. Alcohol kills people by drunk driving and over intoxication.

Alcohol related traffic deaths were over 16000 in 2006. Should we ban alcohol?

Lung Cancer kills over 150,000 people a year (not all directly by smoking, but the majority) should we ban smoking?

[slim1h2o]

So am I!~
Posted by truthrocks at 03:46 PM : Nov 19, 2008

I''m starting to wonder. No, what I have said is not false. I have read many, many times where our troops have come under heavy small arms fire.

I don''t know where you get your info from, but it''s wrong.

[bobgee_1999]

"You are aware of local governments in Texas where just about anyone can carry a gun and they have like zero violent crimes right?"

- biger-e

Yeah, actually I researched this a while back. There were a couple of towns that made gun ownership
"mandatory" (though they never actually enforced it), but these were tiny places with no crime rate to speak of in the first place. And, while the violent statistics didn''t change (at all, one way or another), the burglary rate went through the roof, and there was a good market for stolen guns in the area after that.

A) Owning a gun doesn''t qualify you to use it. B) Owning a gun doesn''t even give you the legal right to use it. C) Are there maybe a few people you know who are stupid or short tempered, any wife beaters or drunks? Is it really a good idea for them to be armed, you think?

[biger-e]

i really do have to go but i am not researching anything to prove to you as i doubt i will change your mind. god forbid but you would probably need a senseless act of violence (gun or no gun) on your family to change your mind. you are aware of how well Poland defended themselves against hitler as the civilians had NO Guns. I hope i never really need mine for anything other than hunting but should i need mine i will be glad i have them. by the way, i''m not capable of going "postal". are you?