Plea Deal Offered To 8-Year-Old Charged With Murdering His Father

PHOENIX — Prosecutors have offered a plea deal to an 8-year-old boy charged with murder in the shooting deaths of his father and another man in their eastern Arizona home, court records show.

Complete details of the offer weren't spelled out in a court filing posted Saturday on the Apache County Superior Court's Web site.

But County Attorney Criss Candelaria wrote that he has "tendered a plea offer to the juvenile's attorneys that would resolve all the charges in the juvenile court contingent on the results of the mental health evaluations."

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

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

Brewer said Saturday that the deal would resolve the case without it being transferred to adult court, but he declined to provide additional details. Although he is considering the offer, Brewer said he is unsure of his client's ability to understand the proceedings. At least two mental health evaluations are yet to be completed.

The prosecutor explained in his response to Brewer's opposition filing that he wasn't trying to obtain an unfair advantage, but he pressed for the dismissal because the judicial system isn't equipped to deal with an 8-year-old charged with murder.

"It is done to ensure that the juvenile and the two murder victims in this case do not fall through the cracks in the system that might occur if both charges remain in the pending delinquency petition," Candelaria wrote.

Story continues below

advertisement

Candelaria explained that the boy could be found incompetent to stand trial, and if that happened, the court's options would be limited.

The court would be required to order efforts to restore the boy to competency, but if that couldn't be done within about eight months, the judge would be required by law to dismiss the criminal case and bar it from being refiled.

The court would then be required to initiate civil commitment proceedings, Candelaria wrote. If the boy is found incompetent because of his age, he wouldn't fit the definition of a mentally disordered person and no treatment would be available.

"Such a result denies the victims and public of any sense of justice for these heinous murders," Candelaria wrote. "It also denies the juvenile the rehabilitative services that he apparently needs to both deal with why he was capable of committing these murders and to assist him with the grief and remorse that he is probably feeling."

Police in St. Johns found Romero and Romans shot to death after the boy ran to a neighbor's house on Nov. 5. The boy was questioned after Romans' wife raised suspicions about him the next day, and in a videotape released by prosecutors, he admits pulling the trigger. Both men were shot several times with a .22-caliber rifle.

Romans worked with Romero and rented a room in his home.

Police reports say the boy told a state Child Protective Services worker that his 1,000th spanking would be his last.

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

Brewer said the boy is back in custody. The next court hearing is set for Dec. 8.

Comments

[scorpioleidy]

This child is charged with PRE-MEDITATED MURDER of TWO people!!! Regardless of the circumstances, he needs to be punished for what he did - at the very least locked up in a juvenile facility until he turns 21. Imagine what the relatives of his two victims must feel, having their loved ones shot dead in cold blood, and the accused being set free with no consequences ... The whole situation is sad, but this boy should not get off with a slap on the wrist for murder.

[stanschurman]

The boy is CHARGED, not CONVICTED. Try to discern the difference.

[SwingingFromCenter]

So your suggestion is to completely remove him of ALL of his developmental years, so that when he turns 21 and is released, he has ZERO social skills?

All because, when he was 8 (btw, how many of us even remember 10 things that happened when we were 8? We were too young to remember most of it), he did something? No way.

All you do if you lock him up until he's 21 is guarantee you have a lifelong criminal. This whole punitive garbage about how we have to have an eye for an eye, even if it's a child's eye, is completely shameful. You want to take away 13 years of this kid's life (where he will learn nothing but how to be a thug)? Please pull the plug--you don't deserve to be on this mudball.

[killmenow]

He's in the THIRD GRADE for God's sake!! What in the world is wrong with you! A child at that age cannot conceive that he murdered anyone! Think back to when you were in the third grade. There is no way that the child planned on killing anyone or realized what he had done.

[redheaded1]

You stated:
"A child at that age cannot conceive that he murdered anyone!"

Actually they can. Children can and do have intent to kill others or themselves. What they don't have is a comprehension of the permanence, the consequences, the moral dimensions of their act.

I think however it came about, this boy is a very damaged and dangerous kid now. I don't know if that can be reversed. I'm not saying he's not a victim of his circumstances. I am saying that victims like that create other victims. He's already shown himself quite capable of that.

[rockyb26]

when i was 8 i knew what dead meant. i also knew that shooting someone could cause them to die. that was 19 years ago, and i'd venture to say that the 8 year olds of today are exposed to alot more than i was (movies, music, 9-11, iraq war). you're selling 8 year olds short.

[jeplanet]

Do you KNOW any 8 year old children??? Obviously not. There is no way an 8 year old kid has the ability to comprehend these actions. His father taught him how to use a gun at 8, and clearly was at least somewhat abusive. This boy needs therapy, and lots of it. Yet you would rather he go to juvenile detention so he can learn how to be a real criminal. How ignorant.
He still needs to be tucked in at night, for crying out loud.

[Metoyer]

The little twerp only defended himself as best he could. IMO he is not guilty of anything, let alone murder. Justifiable homicide is what it seems to have gone down as. Kid should be fine as long as nobody messes with him. He's young enough that he won't end up like Norman Mailer's pal Jack Abbott.

[desthmoneses]

I just don't see how your all so comfortable sending this boy home, he killed his fathers friend who didn't abuse him. How do we know he won't do it again, how can we guarantee the publics interest and safety if this boy is sent home to his mom with a lollipop under the condition of having to talk to some state employee once a week. I'm not comfortable with that unless the psychologists clearly agree that this boy had no understanding or comprehension in the death of the second man. If he killed the second man because he was scared or thought that man would tell the police what he had done then he should not be sent home and should recieve care at a facility that he can't leave. I think you people who just want this kid sent back to school like nothing are being as callous towards the second man and his family as the people calling for this child to be tried as an adult on the right wing blogs.

[metivo]

What's the deal with this case? The question is whether he is a 'bad seed' - an evil, corrupt kid - or just off his rocker. For those of you who think an eight year old is automatically innocent, that is not neccessarily true. It is possible that the 'kid' knew exactly what he was doing and didn't care. After all, there are plenty of people he could have turned to for help if in his mind he felt he was being mistreated. To decide to repeatedly shoot two people is an appalling thing for him to decide to do. But, that he didn't have disiplinary issues at school or any history of violence would seem to indicate temporary insanity or some such.

[cycledoc]

I don't know what's the bigger bad joke. Teaching an 8 year old to use a rifle and then keeping it unsecured. Or trying that child as an adult.

I wonder if the adults who recently allowed another 8 year old try an Uzi at a gun show is also being tried for the death of that child? http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2008/10/police_identify_6.html

Those taking the harsh line on this need to get a life. These are unbelievable tragedies we need to engage in age level behavior and in this case treat the 8 year old as an 8 year old!

[SarahSarah]

I know that not many people agree with this but I don't think it should even be a crime to kill your parents. Based on my observations of people and human nature, it seems that most people are very very forgiving of their parents and would not consider killing them under any circumstances. A parent must do some pretty horrid things to his/her child for the child to overcome this natural love and turn to violence. By the time the child murders someone usually society has let the poor kid suffer enough - there is no need to inflict more misery by putting the kid in jail.

Not that any of this applies to 8 year olds. You probably don't have to do much to enrage an 8 year old to the point of murderous violence since children of this age have very little ability to control their actions and understand consequences. This is why only crazy people would even discuss holding an 8 year old criminally liable for his actions. Children are little crazy antisocial people so I am sure murdering 8 year olds would run rampant in our society if more people let them have access to guns. This is why we socialize children. It takes years parental love, concern, guidance, and affection to get a child to the point that he or she would never ever consider using violence against anyone. This child needs a new REAL parent, some therapy, and a much smarter criminal justice system.

[justkeepswimming]

The Child Protective Services worker who recorded the child's statement about the "1000th spanking" and left him in the home is the one who should be on trial, not that child.

[nwsun]

I wonder how long of timeframe those supposed 1000 spankings was over? If it was over a 3 year period, that would be approximately 1 a day... that would mean he began counting at around age 5... at what age do childrens on average learn how to count to the bigger numbers? especially these days when many adults from the public school system still need to use a calculator to figure out how much change to give back when tendered a $10 or $20 bill... I think more information is necessary to know just what caused this incident...

[disgusted48]

Exactly, and where is the mother?

[MsLiz]

She lost custody. That is another story, I'll bet.

[RogHol]

Yes, ths is insane times two:
1) An 8 year old boy should be taken care of, not prosecuted.
2) Who gave him the weapon? That one should be prosecuted. Was it his father? Justice done, Case closed.

[progressivelady]

I ditto that

[kellygrrrl]

how is it that this kid has zero record of disciplinary problems at school or anywhere else, yet his grandmother speaks of him as though he was some monster, and his own father chose to teach him how to use a gun (even against the advice of the family priest)?

something really does not add up here.

[antaeus]

Smart.

[redheaded1]

See this is what's telling me there's a lot about this boy's psychology that we just don't know.

The cold blooded murder. The good kid at school. The family member that thinks he's a monster. The planning to get revenge for spankings.

He's smart. I think he's very damaged too.

[waitforme]

2) The adult criminal.

That said (see previous on child crimes), adults who commit crimes should also be made to atone and compensate victims for their losses -- possibly for years. The fact that that our poor, sad criminal justice system just deprives people who commit criminal acts against other people (leaving out victimless crimes, many of which likely should not be prosecuted at all) of their freedom (plus medical care, nutritious food, safety, etc.), is what does NOT work, as we have seen in the high rate of recidivism after dangerous criminals are let out. Crimes against victims should result in the (safe) incarceration of the criminal plus being made to face the victims (at least theoretically; some victims do not want to see the perpetrator), make restitution to them (this is where paying criminals to work while in prison would be a very good idea), and to allow judges to tailor sentences toward righting the balance VIS A VIS THE VICTIMS. The normalcy of cases in which the perpetrator and the victim(s) are treated as if they are in separate universes doesn't help the perpetrator or society keep crime off the streets.

[waitforme]

Children should never, ever, be 'tried as an adult', which seems to be what this prosecutor wants. There should be no such concept. And there should be a federal law which prevents such a tactic. Children's brains are not fully developed until over 20 (for boys) and younger for girls. That is why there is Juvenile court for juveniles and adult court for adults.

There have to be different approaches to dealing with children when they commit crimes, including a veering toward rehabilitation and therapy. -- Of course each child should be made to atone and render compensation in some way; for murder, possibly for years; otherwise, his/her guilt will be turned back in on itself and result in resentment and, possibly, further crimes. The degree of the crime should not propel the child into adult court, complete with adult rules and laws. There should be no such thing as 'waiting for the child to become an adult and then prosecuting him'. This is nuts; the prosecution, if any, should be done when and about the time the crime was committed; in this case, the child is eight.

[antaeus]

Whatever the disposition of the case, the local police and prosecutors who grilled and videotaped this child without parent or counsel present, and who then released the videotape to the public, should themselves be charged.

[SwingingFromCenter]

8 year olds can't drink
8 year olds can't smoke
8 year olds can't drive
8 year olds can't vote.

8 year olds, for all intents and purposes, are not citizens of this country. They have no real rights. If an 8 year old is not old enough to vote to help shape the country, then the 8 year old is not old enough to be subjected to a criminal court system designed for adults. End of story.

[Mygirl]

Why not place this little boy in a place where he will get the medical help he needs and stop this insane talk of a plea deal. Have we become so out of touch with child development to know there is something wrong or something went wrong in this child's life.

[Raster]

Is this a story happening in Somalia, Sudan, or some other bottom-of-the-barrel dysfunctional society? No, it's in the USA, "leader of the Free World"!

[redneckliberalpostbush]

Welcome to the Land O the Free- our dictators just smile more, make more jokes and wear T shirts and tennis shoes and ball caps! It's workin ain't it?

[NotMcCain]

The prosecutor is saying two completely different things--one compassionate-sounding ("treatment he needs") and the other harsh ("stand trial for murder....justice should be done.")
.
Dropping one murder charge to have the option to refile (on a boy who received 1000 "spankings"--beatings?--from his father in only a couple of years) seems unduly harsh no matter how you slice it

[SwingingFromCenter]

Yeah, I'm amazed there's not a law against this. "Well, we can't try him now...so we'll let him go for now but once he is old enough to think girls don't have cooties, we're gonna get him good!"

The entire system down there should be ashamed.