I think I know why he was convicted.
A police officer testified that when he responded to a call of shots fired at the convenience store, Romero said nothing had happened. When police arrived at Romero's house later to interview him again, he gave them his 9 mm semiautomatic Smith & Wesson pistol and told detectives that he had fired 16 shots. He also said he knew he had hit Vielma because he saw blood on the pavement after Vielma fled in a car.
Romero told detectives that he did not call police because police had done little in response to past complaints about thefts at the store. His interview with police was played to the jury.
You don't shoot someone and then not call the police. When the police come anyway (because someone is going to hear the shots and call 911), you don't tell them nothing happened when you've shot someone. You don't tell the police how many shots you fired. Let them figure that out. And you don't tell the police you know you hit the bad guy, because that tells them that everything you said previously was a coverup.
What this guy did was within the law, but everything he did subsequently got him convicted of murder. He made himself look guilty. Now, when an armed robber comes into his store, he will be defenseless. Stupid.
The comments of the family of the deceased are disgusting.
Vielma's father, Jorge Vielma, said after the trial that the jury should have sentenced Romero to prison.
"I don't think it's right," he said. "He killed my son for no reason."
No, he killed your son because he was a thief.
Vielma's stepmother, Sherry Vielma, said her stepson should have been prosecuted for a Class C misdemeanor and "not executed and shot in the back." Romero did not testify during the trial.
And wouldn't it be nice if the police would actually investigate the crimes and charge her son with a Class C misdemeanor? He was shot, in part, because the Austin police could care less if a store is being constantly shoplifted.
Jorge Vielma wanted to have children and was always asking her what their names should be, Faxon wrote in the letter.
"He was always joking and his smile lit up his face," the letter said. "Jorge did not have a mean bone in his body and never held a grudge. I cry for him everyday."
No mean bones, just a thieving nature. Spare us the tripe about your son's character. He was a criminal, plain and simple.
movies, better than a half century ago, "backshooters" were looked upon with disdain. I reckon it must be true; there is nothing new under the sun.
