Crystal S., Haleigh's mother #4

[kiki the parrot]

Why is it just because Crystal said she has put drugs in her past it's taken as fact? When Ron said that he doesn't do drugs, hasn't had an arrest in several years for them that he is not telling the truth?

I have heard ad nauseum Ron is stoned, he was on something that day, he is a meth user and so many OTHER rumors but yet he has not been arrested for any of that. That's not to say that things may change in the future however Crystal has NOT been cleared either but she gets a pass on the drug front?

IMO when this first happened she appeared to be wired to the max and yes she had the classic signs of drug withdrawl. I know that her baby girl is missing but I believe it's Ron's baby girl too..just saying

Myspace pages are now private, pictures on there show possible recent drug use. In addition to signs that she has displayed in the first week or so of Haleigh missing.

Just as it has been discussed over and over that Ron appears stoned in this interview or that interview or Ron is a drug dealer all because of his past. There is nothing that says Ron is a current drug user, but we still have to consider drug use may have come into play with Haleigh missing.

(bold mine) Well you didn't hear it from ME. To simply toss out there, "Pictures on there show possible recent drug use" is so far from evidence of any, it reveals the truly desperate lengths some here are willing to go. This mother has her child disappear while in the other parent's custody, is griefstricken, and then when she's hospitalized for a seizure and an accident, some stoop to using even this as proof of unfit mothering and an excuse to mock her grief... unbelievable. JMO

arrot:

 

[kiki the parrot]

Seizure doesn't = epilepsy, necessarily. Seizure disorder (epilepsy) can rule out driving. A woman with a history of two seizures may or may not go on to be diagnosed with seizure disorder. Odds are against it--there are myriad other causes of seizure. If they can find an underlying cause and address it, there's not much reason to assume she'll have another. If they don't find an underlying cause, there's a bit more cause for concern---but not a ton; it's just really unpredictable. If they deny licenses to those who've had seizures, they might as well deny everyone because they might one day get in an accident. It's just too random.

Not every seizure causes convusions nor loss of consciousness (ie grand mal) nor does every type of seizure prevent a person from driving. There are partial seizures which cause only confusion in their aftermath, and absence seizures etc. Some here need a medical education (not to mention a lesson in compassion) before they attempt to assess another person's medical state--much less judge their fitness for parenting. JMO

arrot:

 

[Flossie JMO]

I imagine many people feel the same when they read your posts about Ron and Misty

(bold mine) Well you didn't hear it from ME. To simply toss out there, "Pictures on there show possible recent drug use" is so far from evidence of any, it reveals the truly desperate lengths some here are willing to go. This mother has her child disappear while in the other parent's custody, is griefstricken, and then when she's hospitalized for a seizure and an accident, some stoop to using even this as proof of unfit mothering and an excuse to mock her grief... unbelievable. JMO

arrot:

 

[stilettos]

Yes, this topic is about Crystal. I think the poster was opining that it is neglect (in the legal sense of the word) to leave your children with someone who is obviously still under the effects of a drug and alcohol binge of three day duration. This is IMHO on topic as this may well be Crystal's opinion and reasoning for custody concerns which seems so outlandish to some. My response is, would you have done the same with your children or allowed your ex to do so without legal remedy?

 

[Flossie JMO]

I would hope nobody would leave their child with someone under the effects of drugs and alcohol.

Yes, this topic is about Crystal. I think the poster was opining that it is neglect (in the legal sense of the word) to leave your children with someone who is obviously still under the effects of a drug and alcohol binge of three day duration. This is IMHO on topic as this may well be Crystal's opinion and reasoning for custody concerns which seems so outlandish to some. My response is, would you have done the same with your children or allowed your ex to do so without legal remedy?

 

[kiki the parrot]

I imagine many people feel the same when they read your posts about Ron and Misty

(bold mine) Then they're playing a silly childish game of "His Side, Her Side" and need to learn the difference between campaigning for any of the parties--and advocating for children. Not one time have I said Ron was stoned, acting high, never once accused prescription drug use of being illicit nor w/e other accusations have been bandied about on these threads.

This thread is about CRYSTAL not Ron. W/e admitted drug use which she's acknowledged was a part of her past has nothing to do w why HALEIGH is missing. And the only reason it is being gratuitously interjected and repeatedly tossed around in this forum is in a foolish tit-for-tat by those who want to distract from RELEVANT issues and REAL risk factors in the life of a little girl--who vanished while in the care a teenaged child delegated by her custodial father--and who, unlike many here would have us believe, undoubtedly loved and needed her mother as much as she did her father. I have not participated in the slanderous, small-minded maligning of anyone's character, and resent the implication that I have. The only ones I've sided w are Haleigh and Junior, who I've said deserve to have the benefit of an investigation into claims of abuse. If there turns out to be nothing substantiated, then no one will be more relieved than myself. JMO

arrot:

 

[Flossie JMO]

Interesting.

(bold mine) Then they're playing a silly childish game of "His Side, Her Side" and need to learn the difference between campaigning for any of the parties--and advocating for children. Not once have I said Ron was stoned, acting high, never once accused prescription drug use of being illicit nor w/e other accusations have been bandied about on these threads.

This thread is about CRYSTAL not Ron. W/e admitted drug use which she's acknowledged was a part of her past has nothing to do w why HALEIGH is missing. And the only reason it is being gratuitously and repeatedly thrown into this forum is in a foolish tit-for-tat by those who want to distract from RELEVANT issues and REAL risk factors in the life of a little girl--in the care a teenaged child delegated by her custody father--who, unlike many here would have us believe, undoubtedly loved and needed her mother as much as she did her father. I have not participated in the slanderous, small-minded maligning of anyone's character, and resent the implication that I have. The only ones I have sided w are Haleigh and Junior, who I said deserve to have the benefit of an investigation into claims of abuse. If there turns out to be nothing substantiated, then no one will be happier than myself. JMO

arrot:

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Not every seizure causes convusions nor loss of consciousness (ie grand mal) nor does every type of seizure prevent a person from driving. There are partial seizures which cause only confusion in their aftermath, and absence seizures etc. Some here need a medical education (not to mention a lesson in compassion) before they attempt to assess another person's medical state--much less judge their fitness for parenting. JMO

arrot:

She had a wreck supposedly caused by the seizure. I would say she doesn't need to be driving with or without a child in the car now. Thank goodness this child or some other innocent person were not harmed.

As I said before, it would go directly to what the Doctor recommended after the first seizure as to if she should have been driving. If she were warned and did it anyway...it does go against good judgement to drive especially with her baby in the car, imo.

 

[kiki the parrot]

I have read no theory that links some drug activity of CS to Haleigh's disappearance. So, to me, her seizures call for no more than well wishes that she is OK. Speculating about why someone has a seizure may be amusing but ultimately pointless as we are not Dr's and have no access to her medical records and tests. I also don't see how her seizures and/or their causation are relevant to Haleigh's disappearance.

I think I had read that CS had been to the hospital sometime recently because she hadn't been eating? Lack of nutrition is a possible cause of seizures too just like a host of other things. But I have no way of concluding that any cause is the cause no matter how much I talk about the causes.

There are also many different types of seizures and it's possible CS had them and did not know so the report she only had one previously may not even be true.

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/003200.htm

(respectfully snipped, bold mine) TY! This isn't a mudslinging CONTEST. For Haleigh's sake, we are trying to explore pertinent clues in the environment in which Haleigh was last seen and from which Haleigh inexplicably vanished. Everything else is something in which I've tried mightily to avoid being engaged. If Haleigh had suddenly turned up "missing" while on Crystal's watch, you better believe I would want to know every sordid detail about her past including digging up her drug history, arrest records, every seedy associate, friend, family member and neighbor. But that isn't where Haleigh was last seen nor in whose custody or care she was last known to be--which makes Crystal nothing more than a heartsick parent--apparently affected by her grief. All we've heard is how Crystal shows no sign of grief... maybe this IS her response to stress, initially to the ongoing conflict, and now to that of her CHILD gone missing. For those who can not resist slinging mud, please just ask if it bears some remote relevance to finding Haleigh. TIA JMOarrot:

 

[SeriouslySearching]

(respectfully snipped, bold mine) TY! This isn't a mudslinging CONTEST. For Haleigh's sake, we are trying to explore pertinent clues in the environment in which Haleigh was last seen and from which Haleigh inexplicably vanished. Everything else is something in which I've tried mightily to avoid being engaged. If Haleigh had suddenly turned up "missing" while on Crystal's watch, you better believe I would want to know every sordid detail about her past including digging up her drug history, arrest records, every seedy associate, friend, family member and neighbor. But that isn't where Haleigh was last seen nor in whose custody or care she was last known to be--which makes Crystal nothing more than a heartsick parent--apparently affected by the grief. All we've heard is how Crystal shows no sign of grief... maybe this IS her response to stress, initially to the ongoing conflict, and now to that of her CHILD gone missing. For those who can not resist slinging mud, please just ask if it bears some remote relevance to finding Haleigh. TIA JMOarrot:

This has to go back to the last 30 days prior to Haleigh going missing and not just the night she went missing. Even LE agrees as this is what they mentioned early on in the case. This does place Crystal and her family within this timeline as Haleigh was also in their care for weekend visitation. People do not seem to want to explore ALL the possible suspects equally and to me...this is leaving out a huge piece of the puzzle. It all matters in finding Haleigh and putting this together, imo.

The MUD is on the Sheffield/Griffis' boots in this case. They are the ones throwing it, kicking it, rolling in it, and otherwise encouraging people to do the same, imo.

 

[mck16]

I would hope nobody would leave their child with someone under the effects of drugs and alcohol.

I completely agree, but if you read the transcript of the custody hearing between Ron and Crystal the reason he gave for not returning the kids to her was because she was using cocaine quit heavily. She even admits that. So that is why he had the kids then instead of her.

 

[kiki the parrot]

Interesting.

And it would be which part you find of such particular interest...? That I draw a line between what has been documented in police reports and in case histories--and that which is sheer speculation and rumor? That I make a distinction between what is relevant to the environment from which Haleigh disappeared eg, and one which can yield little if any fruitful clues or evidence? Or maybe it's that I can have concern for the possible implications of lifestyle, associates etc inasfar as they relate to Haleigh's disappearance, w/out the need for further speculation or guesswork re reasons for Ron's present state? Or maybe you just find it interesting that I differentiate between defending one parent to the extent risk factors are overlooked--and erring on the side of caution? W/e it is you find so "interesting" re above statement, pray tell us all and share rather than simply suggest or imply there might be something inconsistent or insincere ... JMO

arrot:

 

[stilettos]

I completely agree, but if you read the transcript of the custody hearing between Ron and Crystal the reason he gave for not returning the kids to her was because she was using cocaine quit heavily. She even admits that. So that is why he had the kids then instead of her.

Then my next question would be:If that was such an issue for you as a responsible parent RC, why the hello did you allow Misty and others access and sole responsiblity of care for your children. This alone in my opinion is enough for removal of the children from his custody and may be why TN is so anxious to paint Misty as an angel of motherhood.

 

[stilettos]

This has to go back to the last 30 days prior to Haleigh going missing and not just the night she went missing. Even LE agrees as this is what they mentioned early on in the case. This does place Crystal and her family within this timeline as Haleigh was also in their care for weekend visitation. People do not seem to want to explore ALL the possible suspects equally and to me...this is leaving out a huge piece of the puzzle. It all matters in finding Haleigh and putting this together, imo.

The MUD is on the Sheffield/Griffis' boots in this case. They are the ones throwing it, kicking it, rolling in it, and otherwise encouraging people to do the same, imo.

As opposed to the BS slinging by TN about Misty being the angel of Mommy mercy and those taking up that hue and cry?

 

[SeriouslySearching]

As opposed to the BS slinging by TN about Misty being the angel of Mommy mercy and those taking up that hue and cry?

At least...they are not making things up as they go, imo. Maybe it is true that Misty is the better caretaker. We don't know yet as nothing has been proven to say she is not one way or another. I don't see there is any BS except coming from Crystal's side...which I can point out many instances of bs being mistaken as mud. They (the Cummings) have a right to defend themselves against it, but they have not stooped to their level that I have seen yet.

 

[kiki the parrot]

This has to go back to the last 30 days prior to Haleigh going missing and not just the night she went missing. Even LE agrees as this is what they mentioned early on in the case. This does place Crystal and her family within this timeline as Haleigh was also in their care for weekend visitation. People do not seem to want to explore ALL the possible suspects equally and to me...this is leaving out a huge piece of the puzzle. It all matters in finding Haleigh and putting this together, imo.

The MUD is on the Sheffield/Griffis' boots in this case. They are the ones throwing it, kicking it, rolling in it, and otherwise encouraging people to do the same, imo.

ONLY because it is Ron and his underage live-in gf--and not Crystal--who were responsible at that time for Haleigh, thus Ron and his underage live-in gf--not Crystal--who are now naturally on the defense. It isn't Crystal who LE evidently feels need explain anything further at this point as she could account for Haleigh the last time and each time it came time for her to turn over Haleigh & Junior following her visitation--and apparently answered LE's questions to their satisfaction. And it is Misty--and not Crystal--who appears the focus of LE's investigation who have stated pointedly that "Misty is the key." The only thing LE agrees is Misty has been inconsistent, unconvincing, more recently uncooperative and that she evidently required polygraphing repeatedly (four times last I counted). It is not Crystal but she (thus possibly Ron) who LE stated has the only answers to help them find Haleigh. I didn't agree w an admittedly poor decision this mother made w/out representation, but we all see the attack she came under for accepting representation. And were it me in her shoes, I don't know if I'd be near as patient nor as understanding as Crystal's been. Believe me. JMO

arrot:

 

[mck16]

Then my next question would be:If that was such an issue for you as a responsible parent RC, why the hello did you allow Misty and others access and sole responsiblity of care for your children. This alone in my opinion is enough for removal of the children from his custody and may be why TN is so anxious to paint Misty as an angel of motherhood.

I have not seen any factual evidence that Misty has a drug issue. I absolutely think she smokes too much, but like I said I have not seen any arrest records, and nothing reported that is based on facts. If there is something out there then we should all see it. IMO

 

[Busylady]

What we do here is look at everyone and everything. I am sorry if you do not agree with that. We have very little facts to go on, so yes we look at every tiny detail and discuss and toss our opinions out there. No one has said you must agree with what is being discussed or anyone elses opinions. I do not have the same opinion of Crystals actions that you do and thats ok, but please do not accuse me of desperate lengths or stooping to some level because I am willing to discuss Crystals actions. Please remember attack the post not the poster.

(bold mine) Well you didn't hear it from ME. To simply toss out there, "Pictures on there show possible recent drug use" is so far from evidence of any, it reveals the truly desperate lengths some here are willing to go. This mother has her child disappear while in the other parent's custody, is griefstricken, and then when she's hospitalized for a seizure and an accident, some stoop to using even this as proof of unfit mothering and an excuse to mock her grief... unbelievable. JMO

arrot:

 

[kiki the parrot]

She had a wreck supposedly caused by the seizure. I would say she doesn't need to be driving with or without a child in the car now. Thank goodness this child or some other innocent person were not harmed.

As I said before, it would go directly to what the Doctor recommended after the first seizure as to if she should have been driving. If she were warned and did it anyway...it does go against good judgement to drive especially with her baby in the car, imo.

Yet again the operative word being SUPPOSEDLY. And this has WHAT again to do w finding Haleigh? Am leaving tiresome, fruitless distraction you persist in. There is a precious child, named Haleigh missing. JMO

arrot:

 

[SeriouslySearching]

ONLY because it is Ron and his underage live-in gf--and not Crystal--who were responsible at that time for Haleigh, thus Ron and his underage live-in gf--not Crystal--who are now naturally on the defense. It isn't Crystal who LE evidently feels need explain anything further at this point as she could account for Haleigh the last time and each time it came time for her to turn over Haleigh & Junior following her visitation--and apparently answered LE's questions to their satisfaction. And it is Misty--and not Crystal--who appears the focus of LE's investigation who have stated pointedly that "Misty is the key." The only thing LE agrees is Misty has been inconsistent, unconvincing, more recently uncooperative and that she evidently required polygraphing repeatedly (four times last I counted). It is not Crystal but she (and possibly Ron) who LE feels has the only answers to help them find Haleigh. I didn't agree w one poor decision made w/out representation, but we all see the attack she came under then for accepting representation. And were it me in her shoes, I don't know if I'd be near as patient nor as understanding as Crystal's been. Believe me. JMO

arrot:

We don't know what LE is doing right now or who they really suspect in this case. They can say whatever they want publically about Misty and be telling her something completely different in private while they are actually looking at someone else. Since we have no way of knowing what direction they are heading, we don't know who they have in their crosshairs. "Give 'em enough rope" could apply to so many people on both sides.

Crystal is the first one to lawyer up which is what I was waiting to see and is of great interest to me. One would think it should have been Misty.