Misty C. #4

[SeriouslySearching]

Thank you for that info. It's not that way here and I've never heard of that before, but it sounds like it would be a good idea in some situations, though perhaps not in others (sometimes people are stupid enough to briefly reconcile with their abusers, then move back out and it would be a shame if the order wasn't still available to them if their partner started stalking them).

And I've also seen cases where they have been misused. Not everyone gets them for the right reasons.

I would think the right against self incrimination extends to proceedings such as these, but wish we had a Fla lawyer on here who does this sort of work to tell us for sure. We might find out tomorrow. I wonder if the matter will proceed and what the outcome will be. I think she will get the order, assuming the matter proceeds.

I wonder how much information will come out at the hearing tomorrow. How deep will the judge want to go into the circumstances surrounding her reasons for filing for it? We should be able to get that information from the press in attendance.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

also from your post: She didn't have a TRO against her, so she didn't violate a TRO. It restrains him from going near her, but not the other way around. He can make his own application for a TRO against her if he likes.




---------------------------
Actually, even though the RO wasn't "against" Misty, intentionally approaching Tommy is a violation--at least in my neck of the woods. Once, a family member required a TRO because her husband had come after her with a gun. The magistrate was very concerned that she understand she was not to intentionally approach her husband or the TRO would become null and void.

I am thinking that it is possible Tommy will bring up "ratgate" at the hearing in order to avoid a permanent order.

JMO--perhaps Florida TROs are different.

I stand corrected on that. As I said in the post above, where I come from we don't have that and I've never heard of that. So, it seems ratgate might come into the proceedings in a big way! I wonder if the neighbor will show up to give evidence for Tommy?

 

[cajun]

I believe it is possible to sleep through, something like this. My hubby is on a shift that he gets home around 3am, four out of five times I've slept through his coming home, and we have a dog that barks at everything, no drugs, no alcohol, just sleep deprivated. But if what Misty says is true to the best of her recollection, what woke her up? JMO

I slept through my neighbor's house burning down and a bunch of emergency vehicles with light and sirens outside of my window. Once I'm in that deep sleep, I am dead to the world.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

I believe it is possible to sleep through, something like this. My hubby is on a shift that he gets home around 3am, four out of five times I've slept through his coming home, and we have a dog that barks at everything, no drugs, no alcohol, just sleep deprivated. But if what Misty says is true to the best of her recollection, what woke her up? JMO

ITA re sleeping through it. I have a multiple cat household and have more than once woken up to see major pieces of furniture, lamps and the like knocked over right beside me, that I have slept through.

I consider it a bit odd that she apparently woke just before Ron got home...of course it could have happened like that, but I can't help but wonder if she may have tried to find Haleigh first, and only told Ron when she told him because she hadn't found her. Which again leads me to think she may have left the home at some point, and didn't want to get in trouble for it and was hoping she'd find Haleigh before Ron got home. Perhaps they have phone records which indicate she was making calls before he got home, but if so, why have we heard nothing from the people she called?

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

I wonder how much information will come out at the hearing tomorrow. How deep will the judge want to go into the circumstances surrounding her reasons for filing for it? We should be able to get that information from the press in attendance.

I would love to be there at those proceedings tomorrow! I do hope the press cover it.

I suppose part of it will depend on whether or not Tommy has a lawyer?...if he has a lawyer, he might want to cross examine Misty at length, and may want to grandstand for the press (a lot of lawyers seem to like to do that).

If he shows up without a lawyer, I suppose he would have to be the one to cross-examine Misty??? If it's like where I am, the Judge would probably also ask a few pertinent questions. I get the feeling Tommy is going to come across as an aggressive and the order will be made, assuming he doesn't consent to it or she doesn't drop it. Somehow I think she's got the sort of family that have probably been pressuring her to drop it. But that's pure speculation on my part.

I wonder if Misty's lawyer will appear on her behalf or if she will be representing herself? I sure hope she has a lawyer there.

 

[slippery-slope]

ITA re sleeping through it. I have a multiple cat household and have more than once woken up to see major pieces of furniture, lamps and the like knocked over right beside me, that I have slept through.

I consider it a bit odd that she apparently woke just before Ron got home...of course it could have happened like that, but I can't help but wonder if she may have tried to find Haleigh first, and only told Ron when she told him because she hadn't found her. Which again leads me to think she may have left the home at some point, and didn't want to get in trouble for it and was hoping she'd find Haleigh before Ron got home. Perhaps they have phone records which indicate she was making calls before he got home, but if so, why have we heard nothing from the people she called?

In the beginning I orginally thought, maybe she was awake when Haleigh was taken and was frozen (too afraid) to do anything, but she would of talked by now(police protection) I think. Now, I think it is important for her to remember exactly what woke her, if she was sleeping, she needs to clarify her timeline, perhaps professional hypnosis. Ease everyones suspisions, on guilt or innocent. JMO

 

[SeriouslySearching]

I don't recall Marie making this statement about Misty.:

Griffis expressed regret for criticizing Cummings and Croslin earlier in the week during a TV interview.

"I'm too old to be criticizing the two, because they're still babies," she said, referring to 25-year-old Cummings and 17-year-old Croslin. "I feel maybe I've done some damage to Misty's heart, and I can't live with myself for doing that.

"The Lord knows that I want to apologize ... and I want to do it face to face," Griffis said.

Griffis' apology appears to have patched a rift between families, as the families of both Haleigh's parents attended Saturday night's vigil.

http://www.gainesville.com/article/...?Title=Officials-press-on-with-Haleigh-search
BBM

Of course, we know this was very short lived...as in a couple of days after she made this statement when they turned on them again. I never understood what exactly happened on Rj's birthday or immediately after to start this up again.

 

[Gracenote]

also from your post: She didn't have a TRO against her, so she didn't violate a TRO. It restrains him from going near her, but not the other way around. He can make his own application for a TRO against her if he likes.




---------------------------
Actually, even though the RO wasn't "against" Misty, intentionally approaching Tommy is a violation--at least in my neck of the woods. Once, a family member required a TRO because her husband had come after her with a gun. The magistrate was very concerned that she understand she was not to intentionally approach her husband or the TRO would become null and void.

I am thinking that it is possible Tommy will bring up "ratgate" at the hearing in order to avoid a permanent order.
JMO--perhaps Florida TROs are different.

BBM
I would and I would bring a copy of the incident report and either an affidavit by the neighbor or the actual neighbor. That is if he wants to contest the order. He may just want to request that it be continued and made mutual to keep everyone away from everyone. On the other hand LOL an order aginst him looks bad and prevents him from having a firearm and such so he may contest it. Or he may not show up. Or she may not.

It'll be interesting to me because it used to be my business.

 

[Gracenote]

I wonder how much information will come out at the hearing tomorrow. How deep will the judge want to go into the circumstances surrounding her reasons for filing for it? We should be able to get that information from the press in attendance.

In my experience,a civil judge would say "we won't go into that because there is a criminal matter pending." but who knows what the judge tomorrow may do.

 

[slippery-slope]

I don't recall Marie making this statement about Misty.:

Griffis expressed regret for criticizing Cummings and Croslin earlier in the week during a TV interview.

"I'm too old to be criticizing the two, because they're still babies," she said, referring to 25-year-old Cummings and 17-year-old Croslin. "I feel maybe I've done some damage to Misty's heart, and I can't live with myself for doing that.

"The Lord knows that I want to apologize ... and I want to do it face to face," Griffis said.

Griffis' apology appears to have patched a rift between families, as the families of both Haleigh's parents attended Saturday night's vigil.

http://www.gainesville.com/article/...?Title=Officials-press-on-with-Haleigh-search
BBM

Of course, we know this was very short lived...as in a couple of days after she made this statement when they turned on them again. I never understood what exactly happened on Rj's birthday or immediately after to start this up again.

I recall another statement Crystal's mom made,(very early, perhaps her first camera appearance) but I have yet to see it in print, and am curious why it has bothered me, all this time. But it was something like this(certainly not a quote but the gest of it) "She(Misty) wasn't even suppose to be there" ???

IMO

 

[Flossie JMO]

We have no info about 6 months ago in that Misty knows the limeline.

Family and friends and out of state

 

[SeriouslySearching]

I recall another statement Crystal's mom made,(very early, perhaps her first camera appearance) but I have yet to see it in print, and am curious why it has bothered me, all this time. But it was something like this(certainly not a quote but the gest of it) "She(Misty) wasn't even suppose to be there" ???

IMO

I will have to see if I can track that one down. Interesting! Thanks~

I found by reviewing some of the initial media reports how many things we have possibly skimmed over in this case during the very early stages of the investigation.

 

[Whisperer]

If Nejame wants to find Haleigh, I suggest he drive Misty to PCSO pronto...doesn't look like anyone else is interested.

 

[Shaymus at The Rock]

I didn't quote the part I meant to. Anyway, in my state if you have an RO against someone and you deliberately violate the terms, it is automatically void. Only fair because I knew women who took out TPOs against men, then called them to come over or move back in, got ticked off and had them arrested for violating the order!

Also,Iamnot sure that you have the right to avoid self incrimination in a civil case which a TPO/RO is. That's why it can work better to sure in civil court. They have to answer.

It may all be different in Fl, though.

Maybe some one from FL will chime in, Grace note. I'd be very surprised if the ROs there are not pretty much the same as they are in most states. IMO, if Misty was in car for ratgate, she violated hers.

 

[Shaymus at The Rock]

also from your post: She didn't have a TRO against her, so she didn't violate a TRO. It restrains him from going near her, but not the other way around. He can make his own application for a TRO against her if he likes.




---------------------------
Actually, even though the RO wasn't "against" Misty, intentionally approaching Tommy is a violation--at least in my neck of the woods. Once, a family member required a TRO because her husband had come after her with a gun. The magistrate was very concerned that she understand she was not to intentionally approach her husband or the TRO would become null and void.

I am thinking that it is possible Tommy will bring up "ratgate" at the hearing in order to avoid a permanent order.

JMO--perhaps Florida TROs are different.

It's a violation in my neck of the woods, also, Crankypants. I think the hearing today could be interesting.

 

[Shaymus at The Rock]

I recall another statement Crystal's mom made,(very early, perhaps her first camera appearance) but I have yet to see it in print, and am curious why it has bothered me, all this time. But it was something like this(certainly not a quote but the gest of it) "She(Misty) wasn't even suppose to be there" ???

IMO

Could you please post a link to the video you're referring to ?

 

[SondraK]

I recall another statement Crystal's mom made,(very early, perhaps her first camera appearance) but I have yet to see it in print, and am curious why it has bothered me, all this time. But it was something like this(certainly not a quote but the gest of it) "She(Misty) wasn't even suppose to be there" ???

IMO

My devious mind asks: Could the plan have been to lure Misty away from the house so that the kidnapping could take place and something went wrong and she returned too early . What a different slant there would have been if Ron came home to find misty and daughter both gone.

 

[Malesherbes]

My devious mind asks: Could the plan have been to lure Misty away from the house so that the kidnapping could take place and something went wrong and she returned too early . What a different slant there would have been if Ron came home to find misty and daughter both gone.

Maybe he came home early and Misty was gone and he acted out in rage and something happened to Haleigh? I think more than likely that happened, Misty comes home- Ron already staged the scene, probably watched her get back in the home- then drives up, and encounters Misty panicking- Misty probably really does not know what happened, thats what I think.

jmo

 

[kamky]

My devious mind asks: Could the plan have been to lure Misty away from the house so that the kidnapping could take place and something went wrong and she returned too early . What a different slant there would have been if Ron came home to find misty and daughter both gone.

Sound very plausible. It would explain why Misty is so unclear on the details if she feels that she was duped and therefore partly responsible and not wanting to face her guilt and lose Ron.

 

[MADJGNLAW]

The rat incedent...could it be that Misty was the person in the passenger seat? If so, they are still considering her to be a juvenile. :waitasec:I think that may be one of the problems LE was having in the past with not being able to question Misty further. I wonder if we will ever find out if it was her?

I will assume that Suspect Information #2 is Misty.
They have blacked out all the details of #2 including name, but do state that Suspect #2 is a Juvenile http://www.docstoc.com/docs/9970528/RatGate