2010.05.13 -Ronald & Hank Jr. Hearing: Ron negotiating for 15yr sentence, Trial 7/19

[1Chump]

I don't think they will be able to take Ronald's deposition in a criminal case. Someone would have to file a civil case for him to be deposed (think OJ's trials).

Florida has an unique set of laws for criminal cases. I forgot they allow depos in crimnal cases. Until someone posted Misty's docket in the drug case to show her attorney has requested subpoenas for despositions of the detectives.

As soon as I read that Florida allows depos in criminal cases, I realized that they had no way to control Ron's testimony. On the witness stand the Judge can order questions regarding Haleigh not be allowed as it is irrelevant to the drug charges.

However, if the defense can show relevance that would be out the door. The way they get the info for relevance would be the depo. Example, if the defense claimed that Misty was forced to sell for Ron because Ron threatened her that he would go to LE and make up lies about Haleigh to get her arrested that would make Haleigh relevant.

Right now, Misty's best chance is the Youthful Offender Program. That defense is not going to get her out of the charges but might be the difference between being sentenced as an adult or as a Youthful Offender.

 

[1Chump]

Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.220 Discovery

(a) Notice of Discovery. After the filing of the charging document, a defendant may elect to participate in the discovery process provided by these rules, including the taking of discovery depositions, by filing with the court and serving on the prosecuting attorney a “Notice of Discovery” which shall bind both the prosecution and defendant to all discovery procedures contained in these rules. Participation by a defendant in the discovery process, including the taking of any deposition by a defendant or the filing of a public records request under chapter 119, Florida Statutes for law enforcement records relating to the defendant’s pending prosecution, which are nonexempt as a result of a codefendant’s participation in discovery, shall be an election to participate in discovery and triggers a reciprocal discovery obligation for the defendant. If any defendant knowingly or purposely shares in discovery obtained by a codefendant, the defendant shall be deemed to have elected to participate in discovery....

(h) Discovery Depositions.
(1) Generally. At any time after the filing of the charging document any party may take the
deposition upon oral examination of any person authorized by this rule. A party taking a deposition shall give reasonable written notice to each other party and shall make a good faith effort to coordinate the date, time, and location of the deposition to accommodate the schedules of other parties and the witness to be deposed. The notice shall state the time and the location where the deposition is to be taken, the name of each person to be examined, and a certificate of counsel that a good faith effort was made to coordinate the deposition schedule. After notice to the parties the court may, for good cause shown, extend or shorten the time and may change the location of the deposition. Except as provided herein, the procedure for taking the deposition, including the scope of the examination, and the issuance of a subpoena (except a subpoena duces tecum) for deposition by an attorney of record in the action, shall be the same as that provided in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Any deposition taken pursuant to this rule may be used by any party for the purpose of contradicting or impeaching the testimony of the deponent as a witness. The trial court or the clerk of the court may, upon application, issue subpoenas for the persons whose depositions are to be taken. In any case, including multiple defendants or consolidated cases, no person shall be deposed more than once except by consent of the parties or by order of the court issued on good cause shown. A witness who refuses to obey a duly served subpoena may be adjudged in contempt of the court from which the subpoena issued.


***************
IMO, Because the depo rules in Florida, Ron cannot take a plea deal that involves agreeing to testify against Misty or Tommy. Although I could believe the DA trying to negotiate a plea deal for this reason, to get Ron under oath in a deposition.

 

[nomoresorrow]

CNN just now confirmed that a deal has been accepted. Ronald Cummings will serve 15 years in exchange for his testimony against Misty & Tommy Croslin.

Another sad day for justice - IMO.

 

[Gwen]

CNN just now confirmed that a deal has been accepted. Ronald Cummings will serve 15 years in exchange for his testimony against Misty & Tommy Croslin.

Another sad day for justice - IMO.

I am so confused. This doesn't make sense. I did notice they said that a plea deal had been accepted. They didn't say who offered it.

My head hurts.

 

[tehcloser]

CNN just now confirmed that a deal has been accepted. Ronald Cummings will serve 15 years in exchange for his testimony against Misty & Tommy Croslin.

Another sad day for justice - IMO.

Ya know, sometimes justice just ain't all it's cracked up to be........

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

I heard it, too, but the story hasn't appeared on the CNN website yet.

If true, I wonder how much time RC will actually serve?

OT/PS: Thanks for correcting the wide margins.

 

[grandmaj]

IMO Ronald was not needed in the cases of Misty and Tommy. Closer to the truth is that this was a way to hide the fact that Ron probably snitched on other suppliers. Time will tell.

If Ron could do so well when he wasn't the mastermind of the operation, (all of the media reports claim Misty was) :waitasec: ???? If true, I would imagine she has lots more to offer up than Ron did.

 

[Quiche]

There's been a retraction by Nancy's source-- Dr. Fessel was on it!!

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - General Theories and Motives Rehashed

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Just reported again on HLN. Their source is WESH. Another thread here says that this report hasn't been confirmed.
WESH report is not verified - per WESH. - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

 

[CN2Souls]

My humble opinion, they do not need RC to prosecute MC and ToC.
This is a way to get MC and ToC to turn on RC and RC is not seeing the repercussions this will have.
Also in Florida;
RC can be deposition for the drug case as to what he will testify about MC and ToC, in the drug case only, the DA can try but most likely will not succeed in steering the deposition to missing Haleigh..
His lawyer will be present and stop any questioning of the Haleigh disappearance by stating “relevance.” I am sure if his lawyer is good they will most defiantly not even go there in the deposition. RC could state anytime they even asked something close to Haleigh whereabouts, “I was at werk!”
Also on the stand when it came right down to testifying I have seen them change their statements from their deposition to “I don’t remember”, or I don’t recall”

 

[azwriter]

I am so confused. This doesn't make sense. I did notice they said that a plea deal had been accepted. They didn't say who offered it.

My head hurts.

I'm with you on this Gwen. I'm watching HLN and they do not cite this information coming from LE, but something reported in a Florida news service.
I'll say it again: when LE holds a press conference and announces they have reached a plea deal with any of the defendents, then I will believe it.
If it is true and LE has arranged a plea deal with Ron in exchange for testimony about his ex-wife in the drug charges, I think it's a ploy to convince Misty into giving up what she knows in the Haleigh case. jmo

 

[CN2Souls]

I'm with you on this Gwen. I'm watching HLN and they do not cite this information coming from LE, but something reported in a Florida news service.
I'll say it again: when LE holds a press conference and announces they have reached a plea deal with any of the defendents, then I will believe it.
If it is true and LE has arranged a plea deal with Ron in exchange for testimony about his ex-wife in the drug charges, I think it's a ploy to convince Misty into giving up what she knows in the Haleigh case. jmo

Humble Bolded by me,
You are right on!!!! I see this many times in cases I have worked here in Florida, you would be shocked how many times this happens.

 

[my_tee_mouse]

Just reported again on HLN. Their source is WESH. Another thread here says that this report hasn't been confirmed.
WESH report is not verified - per WESH. - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

Wesh report updated this afternoon*:

http://www.wesh.com/news/23550990/detail.html

Note it says RC considers a deal, not that one has been reached.

Edited 05/17 at 2:21 EDT, to be exact

 

[Gwen]

I'm with you on this Gwen. I'm watching HLN and they do not cite this information coming from LE, but something reported in a Florida news service.
I'll say it again: when LE holds a press conference and announces they have reached a plea deal with any of the defendents, then I will believe it.
If it is true and LE has arranged a plea deal with Ron in exchange for testimony about his ex-wife in the drug charges, I think it's a ploy to convince Misty into giving up what she knows in the Haleigh case. jmo

Thanks for the reply AZ. This is the first time I have followed one of these cases. Is this kind of shoddy reporting the norm?

I have to wonder why Shoemaker isn't debunking this rumor that Ron is going to turn on Misty.

 

[azwriter]

Humble Bolded by me,
You are right on!!!! I see this many times in cases I have worked here in Florida, you would be shocked how many times this happens.

Oooh, a hint. Cases you have worked...does that mean Humble you're an attorney or working with LE in some capacity? Do tell.

And, nope after being a newspaper reporter for years and years, nothing the cops do surprises me. Thanks for your post.

 

[Searchfortruth]

I have not read the whole thread, so this question may have been asked and answered...but, why would the state even consider giving Ron a deal ? They have the others on tape doing the drug deals, so what do they need his testimony for ?

 

[azwriter]

Thanks for the reply AZ. This is the first time I have followed one of these cases. Is this kind of shoddy reporting the norm?

I have to wonder why Shoemaker isn't debunking this rumor that Ron is going to turn on Misty.

Hey Gwen, welcome to the case.
About shoddy reporting. I must explain how I see it. I worked as a newspaper reporter for about 22 years. In those years, the news was released in the newspaper that was delivered to your front door or was available on the news stand.
Now a days, an early, breaking news report will be posted on a web site. Often, that report has not been seen by more than one editor or proofreader. You can see misspelled words, incorrect grammar and missing punctuation.
It's the new style of media - on the spot. Everyone is in a race to break it first and the web allows that immediate release.
Without the checks and balance of what we found in the news that came in form of a newspaper mistakes are reported. They justify that by knowing they can instantly issue a correction because it's going out over the web.
As an old timer in the news this system drives me nuts.
jmo

 

[Patty G]

WESH 4:00 PM News is on.
http://www.wesh.com/video/14515757/index.html

 

[Patty G]

I'm with you on this Gwen. I'm watching HLN and they do not cite this information coming from LE, but something reported in a Florida news service.
I'll say it again: when LE holds a press conference and announces they have reached a plea deal with any of the defendents, then I will believe it.
If it is true and LE has arranged a plea deal with Ron in exchange for testimony about his ex-wife in the drug charges, I think it's a ploy to convince Misty into giving up what she knows in the Haleigh case. jmo

The information about Ron "taking" a plea deal came out the very next day after Ron was in court. It was clear, that Ron's attorney or it was reported in the media that they were negotiating a plea deal and could come to some agreement by July 1, 2010.

Looks like someone in the WESH media on Friday wanted to "be first rather then be right".

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Hey Gwen, welcome to the case.
About shoddy reporting. I must explain how I see it. I worked as a newspaper reporter for about 22 years. In those years, the news was released in the newspaper that was delivered to your front door or was available on the news stand.
Now a days, an early, breaking news report will be posted on a web site. Often, that report has not been seen by more than one editor or proofreader. You can see misspelled words, incorrect grammar and missing punctuation.
It's the new style of media - on the spot. Everyone is in a race to break it first and the web allows that immediate release.
Without the checks and balance of what we found in the news that came in form of a newspaper mistakes are reported. They justify that by knowing they can instantly issue a correction because it's going out over the web.
As an old timer in the news this system drives me nuts.
jmo

I don't want to lead the thread astray but want to say that I feel your pain I taught high school Journalism in the 1970s when the focus was still: "All the news that fit to print." Varifying reliable sources. Asking and answering the who, what, where, when, why, and how in reporting the facts. No personal opinions other than editorials. No conjecture. "Just the facts, ma'am, just the facts." I can't even imagine what it would be like these days to teach my old-fashioned style of Journalism and make any headway with students. jmo