elle1919
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2008
- Messages
- 5,354
- Reaction score
- 22
I did read your post which is why I responded and I understand what you're saying. Nevertheless I'm still saying this conceivably could be precisely why Misty placed (very generally) the "children..." (vaguely somewhere) "outside" in an attempt to explain why Haleigh may never have been seen by AC man. Whom you evidently believe took note while there of faces and ages of "children outside" while there and was thus able to concur or agree w every specific detail of Misty's story. Misty's various stories are full of bigger holes than this vaguery, and I don't think it makes it simple for AC man to refute, nor "much much riskier" for Misty to lie about, "children" playing at all. Nor do I think he needs to be lying to not be an eye witness to Haleigh being alive--I just don't believe this serviceman was necessarily outdoors counting heads and taking roll. He was inside the house working, I believe, thus perhaps able to confirm for LE at best only that there were eg some "children," playing "outside." Once again tho this isn't not the thread for continuing the discussion so I think an appropriate thread should be used (or begun) for this topic. I don't wish to pursue it further but certainly not here. Thanks.
arrot:
My Bold..Who said anything about the AC Man confirming Misty's story? All that was stated was that if Law Enforcement cleared the AC man and the ac man was at 202 Green Lane on February 9th then he very well could have saw Haleigh. No-one said the AC Man was concurring with every single detail of Misty's story. Who knows what he divulged to Law Enforcement. The only facts we have is that he was there and he was cleared. If Law Enforcement is questioning the repairman about his knowledge and presence at 202 Green lane on February 9th, how could he say geez no I didn't see a little girl. How could Law Enforcement clear one of the people in the home if he never acknowledged seeing the child? Wouldn't that be a red flag? In my opinion it would but I am sure you disagree. Just so I am clear if AC man told LE he never saw Haleigh that day wouldn't that darn well have amounted to confirmation of Misty lying? Wouldn't the police have laid it out and called her on the story if this AC Man that LE cleared gave an eye witness account that Haleigh was not there? Thats exactly the information LE wants to hear.
On the other how convenient it would be if The AC man was related to Ronald. A cousins ex husband, a person that is no longer in the family is going to join in with the cover-up and lie for RC and Misty? When there is 70,000 to be had? I listened to the video that you posted over and over. She did not say RC's cousins ex-husband was the AC Man that came that day. As for starting another thread, to sleuth and validate exactly who the AC Man was, I already know who the AC Man was. We might not know what he said in his interview but we know he was there and he was cleared. For the rest we will have to wait. But I am not the one that wants everyone to believe that the AC Man was RC's cousin. If I make a claim and people question the validity of it, I go find the information to support my claim. Not the other way around.
All of this is my opinion only.
