What is Misty hiding, IF anything?

[BetsyB]

Nor can I, but I was lambasted on this site when I posted that I had called LE on two of my children. I assisted LE in the case and they saw me every visiting day thereafter. They learned that there are consequences to illegal behavior and now as adults are law abiding citizens. My middle child has often warned new foster children in our family.."watch out, my Mom doesn't play and she will call the LE at the drop of a hat." Lesson learned, I say. NO way I would cover....but then TN is definately NOT me.

A parent or guardian can do the right thing, legally, and still love the lawbreaker unconditionally.

Unconditional love doesn't require dishonesty or lawlessness.

I had custody of a lawbreaking nephew during his teens. He was my "first baby"--he'd lived with us when I was a kid, and I really did love him like my own. When he got in trouble with the law, I visited him in jail---but only after helping police put him there. There have been several times since when I've cooperated--with police, US Marshals (he went fugitive), and probation officers.

I will love him. But I will not protect him from the consequences of his own actions.

 

[sweetflbabygirl]

I know Misty is hiding something...here's how (yes, I'll be Captain Obvious):

Why in the world did she assume she was safe?!

If I wake up at 3am and one of my kids is gone, my backdoor is wide open, and I am the only adult in my house---I am going to call 911, run to a neighbors house, something!

I am not going to call my mom and everyone else in my circle! I have to get out of harm's way, because I don't know who/what the harm is. Misty, on the other hand, had to have known the source of the harm, because she stayed in that house "looking" for Haleigh...

The whole 911 call just adds even more trouble to this case. With regard to Ron, all along I have felt as though he knows exactly who he is talking to when he makes his pleas for his daughter (and he doesn't say her name for some odd reason).

DId she go outside and look around? The first thing I would have done was call 911

 

[sweetflbabygirl]

I posted this last night in the rumor thread, but it's applicable here, also.

I just wanted to point out something about polygraph tests. When they are being administered, despite being asked a lot of questions (the beginning ones being control questions), there are generally only THREE relevant questions during the entire exam.

I'll cite two sources here, just to be thorough, but there are tons.

How many questions can be asked? (back to top)

An examiner can usually cover three (3) relevant questions during an exam. This assumes these questions are related to one another (see the question above). It takes about 90 minutes to cover these three questions effectively. If it is necessary to ask more questions, another exam must be designed and conducted, usually at a later time. This will add to the time and cost involved. Test results are usually less reliable with an increase in the number of relevant test questions.

LINK HERE:
http://www.drpoeandassoc.com/faq.htm... be asked?

Another link:
http://www.polygraphguy.com/faq.htm#question5

Hope this was helpful.

I tryed those links they didn't work for me ...

 

[atherella]

I tryed those links they didn't work for me ...

That's strange.

I just tried them, and the first one isn't working right now, but the second one is working fine for me. There are tons of references online that say exactly what I posted (I copied and pasted it). When taking a polygraph exam, only three relevant yes or no questions can be asked. After that, the results become less reliable. Thus, further testing should be done. (Beyond looking this up online, this has been my experience IRL, which is how I knew to look it up and provide cites for everyone).

Here is a different link and a different answer. Try this one:
(Bolding mine)

How many questions can be asked concerning an issue on the exam?

Validated polygraph techniques concentrate on a single or specific issue (e.g. infidelity, robbery, murder) and can contain up to three questions relating to the issue to be examined. Other questions are asked on the exam which do not relate to the issue directly, such as, "Are we in the United States"? The purpose for all examination questions will be explained in detail during the polygraph pretest interview.
LINK:
http://www.imbordinopolygraph.com/faq_examiners.htm

And one more site. This is the 4th one I've provided, with a different answer -- but they all say the exact same thing -- 3 questions only (not including the control questions).


How many questions can I ask? (back to top)

The most accurate test which can be conducted is the one-question (single issue) test, but most clients are not satisfied with having only one issue resolved. Slightly less accurate is the multi-issue test in which the examiner can cover three (3) relevant questions during a single examination, as long as these questions are related to one another (see #4 above). These three questions will take one to three hours to cover effectively due to the extensive test process required. If more questions must be asked, another exam must be designed and conducted following the first one. This usually adds to the time and cost involved. Additionally, an effect called "anti-climax dampening" makes test results less reliable with an increase in the number of relevant test questions. It is the client's choice whether to have a single-question test or a multi-issue test, considering the difference in accuracy (see #1 above). Finally, a healthy individual can only produce readable polygraph charts for a limited period of time. After this time has expired, it is impossible to generate a conclusive polygraph test and any further testing must be scheduled for a different day.

LINK:
http://www.polytest.org/work/polyfaq.htm#howmanyquestions

If you play around on google, you will find a TON of sites that explain polygraph testing. They all say the same thing, though, I've found. Hope this helps.

 

[sweetflbabygirl]

That's strange.

I just tried them, and the first one isn't working right now, but the second one is working fine for me. There are tons of references online that say exactly what I posted (I copied and pasted it). When taking a polygraph exam, only three relevant yes or no questions can be asked. After that, the results become less reliable. Thus, further testing should be done. (Beyond looking this up online, this has been my experience IRL, which is how I knew to look it up and provide cites for everyone).

Here is a different link and a different answer. Try this one:
(Bolding mine)

How many questions can be asked concerning an issue on the exam?

Validated polygraph techniques concentrate on a single or specific issue (e.g. infidelity, robbery, murder) and can contain up to three questions relating to the issue to be examined. Other questions are asked on the exam which do not relate to the issue directly, such as, "Are we in the United States"? The purpose for all examination questions will be explained in detail during the polygraph pretest interview.
LINK:
http://www.imbordinopolygraph.com/faq_examiners.htm

And one more site. This is the 4th one I've provided, with a different answer -- but they all say the exact same thing -- 3 questions only (not including the control questions).


How many questions can I ask? (back to top)

The most accurate test which can be conducted is the one-question (single issue) test, but most clients are not satisfied with having only one issue resolved. Slightly less accurate is the multi-issue test in which the examiner can cover three (3) relevant questions during a single examination, as long as these questions are related to one another (see #4 above). These three questions will take one to three hours to cover effectively due to the extensive test process required. If more questions must be asked, another exam must be designed and conducted following the first one. This usually adds to the time and cost involved. Additionally, an effect called "anti-climax dampening" makes test results less reliable with an increase in the number of relevant test questions. It is the client's choice whether to have a single-question test or a multi-issue test, considering the difference in accuracy (see #1 above). Finally, a healthy individual can only produce readable polygraph charts for a limited period of time. After this time has expired, it is impossible to generate a conclusive polygraph test and any further testing must be scheduled for a different day.

LINK:
http://www.polytest.org/work/polyfaq.htm#howmanyquestions

If you play around on google, you will find a TON of sites that explain polygraph testing. They all say the same thing, though, I've found. Hope this helps.

ty that one worked

 

[txsleuth]

Originally Posted by Charla

I know Misty is hiding something...here's how (yes, I'll be Captain Obvious):

Why in the world did she assume she was safe?!

If I wake up at 3am and one of my kids is gone, my backdoor is wide open, and I am the only adult in my house---I am going to call 911, run to a neighbors house, something!

I am not going to call my mom and everyone else in my circle! I have to get out of harm's way, because I don't know who/what the harm is. Misty, on the other hand, had to have known the source of the harm, because she stayed in that house "looking" for Haleigh...

The whole 911 call just adds even more trouble to this case. With regard to Ron, all along I have felt as though he knows exactly who he is talking to when he makes his pleas for his daughter (and he doesn't say her name for some odd reason).

I have to completely agree with your thoughts in this post...

A young, 17 yr old girl, isn't generally that comfortable being alone at night....and just going by my own home, my own daughters, etc...there's no way they would have stayed in that house if they awoke to a light being on and a back door being unlocked & open. They would have ran out of that house screaming with cellphone in hand. Or they would have ran out with babies/kids in their arms.

IMO, it is very strange that Misty stayed in the home, and instead, just called Ronald several times.

 

[txsvicki]

Misti called Ron several times? I hadn't heard that, just at the beginning it was said she was about to "try" and call him.

 

[Lexington]

What I understood was that Misty was trying to get Ron on the phone, but he was so close to the house that he didn't bother to answer it. Typical chip on the shoulder Ron behavior IMO.

 

[Charla]

What I understood was that Misty was trying to get Ron on the phone, but he was so close to the house that he didn't bother to answer it. Typical chip on the shoulder Ron behavior IMO.

Even if she only tried to get him on the phone, every second counts when you are in "danger". Why call Ron, when you know he will be home any minute...instead get out of the house and call LE, because they are the people who can really help you.

It's almost like for some reason she had to wait for Ron to get there and give the go ahead for her to call LE. Wonder why that would be; I smell a staged call with a slight hint of cover up. JMO

 

[lil momma]

Even if she only tried to get him on the phone, every second counts when you are in "danger". Why call Ron, when you know he will be home any minute...instead get out of the house and call LE, because they are the people who can really help you.

It's almost like for some reason she had to wait for Ron to get there and give the go ahead for her to call LE. Wonder why that would be; I smell a staged call with a slight hint of cover up. JMO

i agree with you Charla! it struck me as odd as well. why did RC have to tell her to call 911? i said this from the beginning, RC knows a lot more than he is leading anyone to believe including LE.

 

[txsvicki]

What I understood was that Misty was trying to get Ron on the phone, but he was so close to the house that he didn't bother to answer it. Typical chip on the shoulder Ron behavior IMO.

That's really weird. Most people with cell phones look and see who's calling when it rings. If Ron bothered to look he would have seen that Misti was calling. Instead, he says that he knew something was wrong when he pulled up to the house and saw Misti standing in the front door and wondered why she was up. What about his phone ringing, wasn't that some sort of alert that something was wrong!

 

[mck16]

I just saw on HLN George Anthony tell an attorney that if he asked him the same question one more time he was walking out of the deposition. sounds like what Misty did when she left the interview because the interviewer was being rude and implying she was lying.

 

[titanfan62702]

That's really weird. Most people with cell phones look and see who's calling when it rings. If Ron bothered to look he would have seen that Misti was calling. Instead, he says that he knew something was wrong when he pulled up to the house and saw Misti standing in the front door and wondered why she was up. What about his phone ringing, wasn't that some sort of alert that something was wrong!

Not necessarily. The last time my son was here overnight, his phone rang all night.

As far as not checking it, surprisingly, he might have practiced safe driving, and figured he'd call back when he got home. That's how I handle it.

Oh, back to what is Misty's hiding -- maybe we need to add "that she brought something into the house (like drugs)".

 

[kikid]

That's really weird. Most people with cell phones look and see who's calling when it rings. If Ron bothered to look he would have seen that Misti was calling. Instead, he says that he knew something was wrong when he pulled up to the house and saw Misti standing in the front door and wondered why she was up. What about his phone ringing, wasn't that some sort of alert that something was wrong!

see this is where they didn't sort the stories through before telling them. Misty says she's calling him, but he says the first indication he had of something being wrong was that she was awake when he pulled up - either his phone was turned off, or he is lying. Surely he'd know she was awake (something wrong) before pulling in the driveway if she'd been calling..... duh!

Now if the phone was off, then fine & understandable, but if not - hinksville.

 

[kikid]

Not necessarily. The last time my son was here overnight, his phone rang all night.

As far as not checking it, surprisingly, he might have practiced safe driving, and figured he'd call back when he got home. That's how I handle it.

Oh, back to what is Misty's hiding -- maybe we need to add "that she brought something into the house (like drugs)".

did he really need to look - who would be calling him at 3:25 a.m. besides her?

 

[titanfan62702]

did he really need to look - who would be calling him at 3:25 a.m. besides her?

A co-worker who had also just gotten off work. Who knows.

As I said, my son's phone didn't stop ringing, day or night.

 

[Bobbisangel]

I don't think that Misty is hiding anything. I don't think that Ron is hiding anything either. I think that when questioned Misty did the best that she could in answering the questions. She is a kid who was probably really upset and just because she didn't go step by step in what she did from the second that she got up to go to the bathroom doesn't mean that she was lying. I think it is pretty normal for people to forget some things and remember them later. This girl was asleep when she woke up to go to the bathroom. I know that when I wake up in the middle of the night to use the bathroom there are times that I am bouncing off the walls because I'm still half asleep. I probably wouldn't be able to tell a story from start to finish and get it 100% right at first.

I don't believe RJ about a black man and a bouncing couch. If that was true he would have said so in the beginning. It wasn't until after he spent time with his mother that everything was added to the "man in black that took Sissy." When Crystal and RJ were on Geraldo's show she led that little boy through his story by giving him the answers first and then asking him if that was right or however she worded it. He was coached by his mother who shouldn't have been talking to him about it. A professional who works with kids should have been the person who talked to RJ because they know how to talk to kids without leading them. I think someone like that did talk to RJ when Haleigh first disappeared. Then came Crystal and all of this other stuff was added to the story.

I think that if Misty knew anymore LE or the FBI would have gotten it out of her. LE said that the best they and the FBI have had questioned Misty and didn't get anymore info from her. Misty is a kid and she isn't smart enough to beat LE and the FBI. I just don't believe that. They would have broken her by now and they can't. That is because she has told them all that she knows even if it came out at different times. I don't believe for a second that Ron would cover for her if he even thought she knew what happened or had a part in it. There would probably be bloodshed. I don't believe that Ron had anything to do with Haleigh's missing. I also believe that if he had an inkling about who took her or where she is we would know because he would have gone after the person or to the place.

 

[kaRN]

I voted for number one- she wasn't home but it's very possible she also had people over before she went out.
I think Misty is the one who propped open the back door with the cement block because she couldn't find her keys, or they were in the bedroom and she didn't want to risk rummaging around and waking up the children.
I'm afraid Haleigh either woke up and went outside to find Misty or her Dad and slipped into one of the alligator ponds nearby or
One of the people Ron ratted out to LE, or someone he owes drug money to has taken Haleigh as collateral. It explains some of the strange comments he's made to the media, comparing Haleigh to property like he's speaking to an individual and not the nation. It also explains the shot gun marriage. If Haleigh wanted this so badly and you're a dreamy 17 yo girl, wouldn't you want to have the fairytale wedding for her and you (within means)? Hold on until she gets home so Haleigh can be the flower girl? You pick your own flowers and put up white streamers. A little can go along way if you're doing it with love in your heart. Things don't have to cost 1000's. You put a white sheet on the picnic tables, whatever. What I saw of Misty and Ron's wedding was pretty scary. Maybe I'm a total snob, but people dress for an occasion better on 'the Trailer Park Boys'. I wouldn't let my daughter marry a guy wearing a wife beater during the event. I'd drag her far and away right then and there.
My child is missing and there's a massive search. I'm on my honeymoon with my teen bride who was the last one to see her. HUH?
:doh:

 

[maryaok]

Originally Posted by Charla


I have to completely agree with your thoughts in this post...

A young, 17 yr old girl, isn't generally that comfortable being alone at night....and just going by my own home, my own daughters, etc...there's no way they would have stayed in that house if they awoke to a light being on and a back door being unlocked & open. They would have ran out of that house screaming with cellphone in hand. Or they would have ran out with babies/kids in their arms.

IMO, it is very strange that Misty stayed in the home, and instead, just called Ronald several times.

The thought occured to me a while ago that she was lucky and the boy were lucky to have slept through whatever occured. Had they woken up and witnessed something, they could both be dead right now. But now, I'm starting to look at this all a different way, since finding about MC's relationship with this other guy, and perhaps she was past out on drugs and didn't wake up because of that.

But still, I do believe that if Ron thought one of M's acquaintances had his daughter, I don't think he'd hesitate to confront the guy himself, and to tell police about him, or her.

 

[wandering]

I don't think Haleigh wandered away and fell into a pond. Her body would have surfaced by now. I think someone took her, and she could be in another state by now. I'm praying she's still alive.