Defending Misty on Jan 10, 2011 in Putnam County

[Crosby87]

In re: post 214 from Bluesky.

When I read your post...it made me think about what Misty said in one of her jailhouse videos.....she talked about how they used her...and that since the Cummings had everyone waiting on them hand and foot...they didn't need Misty anymore. Could this be true?

Didn't a few of them get new cars after Haleigh disappeared?

But what confuses me..is that in October '09 Shoemaker claimed that they were going to try and find a private investigator but in order to do so they needed funds...they were going to be taking donations, I think. So if Ron had all this money, why couldn't he afford a PI to look into his daughters disappearance? Could the well have run dry by October '09? Maybe they were all hurting for money by then..didn't Teresa get evicted some time later? what happened to the money? It doesn't seem like any of it went on searching for Haleigh...

Misty fit into Ron's life when he needed a babysitter for HaLeigh and Junior but after HaLeigh vanished and Ron was no longer employed at PDM Bridge she lost her usefulness and felt displaced when her services were no longer required.

I remember when Terry Shoemaker said Ron needed funds to hire a PI; so why did Ron reject LP’s offer?

<snipped>

LEONARD PADILLA: When I was sitting next to Ron when he was getting ready to go on Nancy Grace&#8217;s Show, I offered him ½ million dollars to search for his daughter and he said, &#8220;No, that&#8217;s okay&#8221;.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/levipage/2010/04/19/haleigh-cummings-homicide-investigation

Here is additional information on Ronald&#8217;s finances. I&#8217;m not sure if the fund set up at the Bank of America is the account that was set up in Crescent City which paid Ron&#8217;s vehicle insurance, water and hydro bill. We know for a fact Ron received $12000 from Crystal and I guess we will have to take Chelsea&#8217;s word when she said she saw Ron accept a cheque for $10000. Watts said less than $1000 has been spent on Ronald&#8217;s bills; It doesn't look like Ron paid his monthy water and hydro bills when he lived on Greene Lane for 4 months. He may even have owed money for utility bills from the previous place he rented. That is alot of money for utility bills IMO. He moved to Greene Lane in Nov 08 and out at the end of Feb 09. I wouldn't be surprised if Ron owed the Bards rent money. Ron was working fulltime for PDM Bridge so he should have been able to pay his utility bills. According to AH, RC was not giving Misty any money.

When would Ron receive his income tax refund if he filed by the deadline? If he was renting accommodations and supporting 2 children, wouldn't he have received a decent refund in 2009as well?

<snipped>

A fund is set up at Bank of America to help the Cummings family. Anyone wishing to donate should reference the "Haleigh Cummings Relief Fund." A similar account is being established for Crystal Sheffield, Haleigh's mother.

As the mystery surrounding the disappearance of the still-missing 5-year-old moves further into its second month, donations of outsiders have helped sustain those closest to the case. A Bank of America relief fund has collected about $5,000, according to the account's trustee, a local funeral home operator.

In nearby Crescent City, a bank account fueled by donations has paid a vehicle insurance bill, a water payment and a power bill for Haleigh's father, Ronald Cummings. Cummings, who has said he is unable to return to the blue mobile home where Haleigh vanished, is living at his grandmother's in Welaka with his new wife and 4-year-old son.

Less than $1,000 has been spent on the insurance and other bills, Watts said. Set up by the bank under rules outlined by Florida law, money from the account cannot be used in support of Haleigh's mother because she was not living in the house at the time of the disappearance. Watts said any withdrawals from the account must be approved by him and be used for a specific bill and certain expenses. In the past week and a half, donations have trickled off, he said. Since the beginning only a handful of small checks came from out of state, with most of the money coming from within Putnam County.

A local church placed donation jars in the area and donated to the account.

"The lady didn't know what to do with it," Watts said. He said he told the church he could only accept money for Cummings. He did not know if some of the cash went to Sheffield.

Cummings' grandmother, Annette Sykes, said the family kept a journal of donations. "We wrote the names and addresses down," she said.

After money in the Cummings account is no longer needed, the remainder will be sent to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, Watts said.

Picazio said any that is left in any account set up for Sheffield would be distributed in a similar way.

http://www.zimbio.com/Haleigh+Cummings/articles/128/Community+contributes+Haleigh+family+funds

 

[1Chump]

Dec 22, 2009
Misty and her brother Tommy sell 45 oxycodone to the undercover dectective (UC). Tommy makes several phone calls before a guy in a black pick-up truck delivers the pills to him while Misty and the UC wait in the UC's car across the street.

January 8, 2010
Misty had been in Virginia with Donna Brock for several days. On the way back to Florida, she talks to the UC by phone and offers "to sell [UC] a large quantity of 7.5mg "Endocet" (hydrocodone) prescription pills. Cummings told [UC] that she and Brock had a 'lot of them'."

These were the first two transactions between Misty and the detective. If you read the incident reports, it's quite obvious that Misty was acting on her own.January 12, 13, and 14, 2010
Three more transactions take place. Ron and Misty are involved in all three. Hope is present during two, but only charged in the Jan. 13th transaction.

On Jan. 12th, there is a bungled attempt to get drugs to sell to the UC. In the end, they come up with only nine Lortabs, but promise more the next day.

On Jan 13th all three entered the UC's car, and "Misty directed UC to give her the money and drive down Old San Mateo Rd...where M. Cummings and Sykes exited the vehicle and walked up to an unknown residence" from which they obtained the 25 hydrocodone pills they subsequently sold to the UC. I'm fairly certain that the source of the drugs was Hope's contact. It's in the video of this transaction that we hear Ron promise to have 50 yellow Percocets from "right around the corner" in the next day or two.

On Jan 14th, Ron and Misty sold the UC 71 hydrocodone. Still no Percocets or Roxies.

January 18, 2010
Misty and the UC drive to a house in San Mateo where they pick up NayNay's little sister "K". The three drive to another house on Tropic Ave where Misty and "K" get 18 hydrocodone (not the oxycodone Ron "guaranteed"). Later, the UC drives Misty to a Kangaroo where Ron is waiting for her. Ron is not charged, though he does talk to the UC about a future transaction.

Ron and Misty were ultimately charged with transactions on Jan 19th and 20th. The warrants were issued after their arrests, and the incident reports have not been published, but we have seen video from the final incident on Jan 20th when Misty and Ron turned the tables and agreed to sell 200 pills for the UC.

Links to the first six incident reports can be found at this post in the Media thread here in Haleigh's forum.
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - MEDIA / LINKS ONLY - No discussion

If you haven't read them, I recommend doing so. They are the best source of factual information (about the drug dealings) available to us.

Brief footage from five of the transactions can be seen in the video at this link.
http://video.gainesville.com/video/68075153001

Clearly, neither Ron nor Misty is a drug kingpin. On the contrary, as drug dealers go, they're rank amateurs. Sure, Ron exhibits a lot of bravado because that's a feature of his personality. At times, Misty does, as well. But few seasoned drug dealers spout off to a new contact as much information as we hear from Ron.

As to why Misty had no priors before meeting Ron, Misty's familiarity with drugs is well documented. Her parents are drug abusers, and her known friends have all been arrested for drugs both before and after Haleigh went missing. There was the three day binge we've heard so much about. And, on October 20, 2009, Misty and two other young women were mugged at an apartment complex in Palatka. One of the women told police they had gone there to buy drugs.

http://www.gainesville.com/article/...-robbed-while-trying-to-buy-drugs-police-say-

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/local/news-article.aspx?storyid=146957&catid=3

Misty didn't need Ron to get her into trouble. She was quite capable of doing that on her own. If she truly has no record as a juvenile, it was just a matter of time. Sure Ron's a bully and a lot of other things. But in this drug mess, neither is more guilty nor innocent than the other.

IMO, three incidents, Misty never touched the pills and/or money. With Tommy, Tommy handled everything. Misty left with Tommy. By Misty leaving with Tommy, they could make the case that she was an accessory despite not touching the pills and/or money.

However, with both Donna and the "unidentified white female" the UC brought Misty into the deal by paying her money for facilitating the deal. Until Misty was paid that money, Misty did not have contact with either the pills or the money. Therefore the cases against Misty would be very weak. They had the calls but hard to make a case that she was dealing when she did not make any money or even leave with the money. The deal with the UWF, Misty met Ron and left with him. Although Ron was not involved in that particular transaction, he did discuss a future deal with the UC.

IMO, Ron found out that with the Donna deal, Misty received extra money for brokering the deal. Misty probably hide it from Ron because she told the UC in her next call that the money was stolen. The next time Misty was helping a friend and received a "brokering fee" Ron just happened to met her. IMO, to make sure she did not hide her brokering fee.

All the other deals both Ron and/or Misty had contact with the pills and/or money. But Ron was always the last one with the money.

IMO, yes Misty would have eventually got busted for possession and/or under the influence. I don't think Misty would have got busted for dealing. Misty NEVER picked up pills all by herself. Tommy and Ron left by themselves and came back with pills. But Misty had either Hope or the UWF with her when she picked up the pills. IMO, Hope and the UWF had the contacts not Misty.

IMO, the so-called drug deals show that Misty will do anything to "help" a friend. Mommy and Daddy trained her "right." Because without the UC volunteering to pay her extra money, her "friends" were the ones who profitted from those deals.

IMO, if Misty was the "mastermind" she had only mastered setting up other people to sell drugs and make money while she hoped for scraps.

 

[suspicious1]

IMO, three incidents, Misty never touched the pills and/or money. With Tommy, Tommy handled everything. Misty left with Tommy. By Misty leaving with Tommy, they could make the case that she was an accessory despite not touching the pills and/or money.

However, with both Donna and the "unidentified white female" the UC brought Misty into the deal by paying her money for facilitating the deal. Until Misty was paid that money, Misty did not have contact with either the pills or the money. Therefore the cases against Misty would be very weak. They had the calls but hard to make a case that she was dealing when she did not make any money or even leave with the money. The deal with the UWF, Misty met Ron and left with him. Although Ron was not involved in that particular transaction, he did discuss a future deal with the UC.

IMO, Ron found out that with the Donna deal, Misty received extra money for brokering the deal. Misty probably hide it from Ron because she told the UC in her next call that the money was stolen. The next time Misty was helping a friend and received a "brokering fee" Ron just happened to met her. IMO, to make sure she did not hide her brokering fee.

All the other deals both Ron and/or Misty had contact with the pills and/or money. But Ron was always the last one with the money.

IMO, yes Misty would have eventually got busted for possession and/or under the influence. I don't think Misty would have got busted for dealing. Misty NEVER picked up pills all by herself. Tommy and Ron left by themselves and came back with pills. But Misty had either Hope or the UWF with her when she picked up the pills. IMO, Hope and the UWF had the contacts not Misty.

IMO, the so-called drug deals show that Misty will do anything to "help" a friend. Mommy and Daddy trained her "right." Because without the UC volunteering to pay her extra money, her "friends" were the ones who profitted from those deals.

IMO, if Misty was the "mastermind" she had only mastered setting up other people to sell drugs and make money while she hoped for scraps.

1Chump, that's it....right there...

I kept reading Bessie's post (btw, very informative Bessie.thank you) and something just didn't seem right to me...I have quite a few comments but will share when I get my thoughts together...What you have stated is the way I read the reports too.

 

[vjlaw]

Q: Who had Jr when RC didn't have him?

I assume you mean where was JR while Ron was dealing drugs with Misty; before Ron, Misty, & Tommy were incarcerated and Crystal regained custody of Junior.

When Chelsea appeared on Levi Page’s Show, she said Ron didn’t pay any attention to Junior. He didn’t give Junior the time of day immediately after HaLeigh disappeared.

I heard Misty say her and Ronald had to go pick up Junior from a daycare prior to them being busted so JR was attending preschool part-time.

Junior also maintained biweekly visits with his mother Crystal Sheffield until Ron was incarcerated.

Chelsea Croslin said Junior lived at his Aunt Katrina's place after Haleigh vanished which was news to me because I thought Junior was staying with R&M at Annette’s place. Unfortunately I don't have a link to verify this.

Q: What did they think RC was doing when he didn't have a job?

If you mean what did LE think Ron was doing to generate an income after he quit working for PDM Bridge, Ron lived off the money and gifts he received.

After HaLeigh went missing, Ron refused to move back into the trailor and when he couldn't stay in the tent due to zoning by-laws, someone provided Ron with temporary living accommodations. Chelsea said Ron received a huge amount of money and gifts from donors so IMO, Ron wasn’t drawn into drug trafficking because he was in desperate need of money like Misty stated in Court she was. I don’t know if Ron has ever had to account for the free money and gifts he received, but Crystal who started the HaLeigh Bug Foundation did, although there were reports she failed to present her financial records upon request.

FYI, Chelsea said Ron helped himself to the money he received to pamper himself and pay for trips. R&M married because that is what HaLeigh wanted, and who knows people may have sent them money as a wedding gift. When they appeared as guests on popular Talk shows, they likely had all their expenses paid for them. Ron planned and attended mud bogging events with friends. He used his notoriety to get free meals in restaurants for him and his friends according to AH. Ron retained a lawyer so he wouldn't have to fill his time up in lengthy interviews with LEO who were investigating his daughter's disappearance; and Ron, according to Chelsea, put a stop to Misty's interviews with LE. Ron received $12000 from Crystal for child support after HaLeigh vanished. Ron and Misty moved in with Ron’s grandmother and whether or not Ron paid room and board is unknown to me but he was no longer solely responsible for maintaining a home, paying the bills, and putting food on the table. His tattoos of JR and HaLeigh were also "gifts". We don’t know if the balloons released on HaLeigh’s birthday were "gifts" or paid for by donations to the Cummings family. One billboard with HaLeigh on it was apparently donated by Crimestoppers.

<snipped>

CHELSEA CROSLIN: I mean they took trips everywhere. Ronald was given so much donation money from HaLeigh’s case you know and he used it to his full advantage. He pampered himself. He treated himself like he was a King instead.

LEVI PAGE: Some people seen Chelsea Ron Cummings at a convenience store take donation money out of a jar and use it buy beer.

CHELSEA CROSLIN: I wouldn’t be surprised about it. I watched Ronald be handed so much money he would walk around smiling. He pulled out a wad one day and just looked at me and said ‘hey look Chel’ with a big ole smile and I was just like, whoa you know, I was like what is that for? Because I thought there is that bank account, why are you holding onto that? You know I saw a man pull up on a 3-wheeler and hand Ronald a cheque for $10,000.

PAT BROWN: Can I ask a question Chelsea? Did Ronald ever talk about putting billboards up with all the money he was getting?

CHELSEA CROSLIN: No, Ron never talked about nothing that he was going to do with the money. I just saw him and the rest of his family pampering themselves with the money. I do know there was a billboard put up for HaLeigh but I don’t know who funded that.

LEVI PAGE: Crimestoppers I think.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/levipage/2010/10/05/levi-page-show

Wow, thanks for your time in answering my question. There are no easy answers apparently in this case. It sounds like Ron may have run through the gift money quickly, doubt he put any away for JR's college. jmo. I hope LE knew and was watching what was going on with Jr and who was taking care of him and how much time Ron spent with him. I wasn't at all clear who I meant when I asked the question about who and what "they" thought he was doing. I was thinking more along the lines of RC's family. Crystal didn't get JR that much so the rest of the time JR had to be with someone and I was just wondering what Someone thought Ron was doing that he couldn't take care of his own son. Sounds like he never had time for Jr anyway so maybe they didn't notice when RC wasn't taking care of JR because that was common practice for RC.

 

[lil momma]

In re: post 214 from Bluesky.

When I read your post...it made me think about what Misty said in one of her jailhouse videos.....she talked about how they used her...and that since the Cummings had everyone waiting on them hand and foot...they didn't need Misty anymore. Could this be true?

Didn't a few of them get new cars after Haleigh disappeared?

But what confuses me..is that in October '09 Shoemaker claimed that they were going to try and find a private investigator but in order to do so they needed funds...they were going to be taking donations, I think. So if Ron had all this money, why couldn't he afford a PI to look into his daughters disappearance? Could the well have run dry by October '09? Maybe they were all hurting for money by then..didn't Teresa get evicted some time later? what happened to the money? It doesn't seem like any of it went on searching for Haleigh...

ITA suspicious!!!!

(seems i am always trailing you ..lol) your post made me think about TN's comment about Ron almost having enough money to buy a house.... the thing i don't recall is if that was said AFTER someone paid Crystal's child support or if it was said BEFORE.

I always thought that TN was trying to paint a picture perfect life for Ron. JMO

 

[bessie]

IMO, three incidents, Misty never touched the pills and/or money. With Tommy, Tommy handled everything. Misty left with Tommy. By Misty leaving with Tommy, they could make the case that she was an accessory despite not touching the pills and/or money.

However, with both Donna and the "unidentified white female" the UC brought Misty into the deal by paying her money for facilitating the deal. Until Misty was paid that money, Misty did not have contact with either the pills or the money. Therefore the cases against Misty would be very weak. They had the calls but hard to make a case that she was dealing when she did not make any money or even leave with the money. The deal with the UWF, Misty met Ron and left with him. Although Ron was not involved in that particular transaction, he did discuss a future deal with the UC.

IMO, Ron found out that with the Donna deal, Misty received extra money for brokering the deal. Misty probably hide it from Ron because she told the UC in her next call that the money was stolen. The next time Misty was helping a friend and received a "brokering fee" Ron just happened to met her. IMO, to make sure she did not hide her brokering fee.

All the other deals both Ron and/or Misty had contact with the pills and/or money. But Ron was always the last one with the money.

IMO, yes Misty would have eventually got busted for possession and/or under the influence. I don't think Misty would have got busted for dealing.

Hi 1chump. Glad you rang in here. I'll reply to more later when i get home. For now I want to point out it's my understanding that under Florida's conspiracy laws Misty would have been guilty of trafficking even if she had not beem physically present during the transactions.

References to come.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lanie]

This post was precious. It made me laugh (although the case is not funny by any means) and realize just how far out all of this has taken us to try to come up with a solution as to what happened to Haleigh. I'm back on planet earth now. Lanie, with all of that said, what's your take on what happened to her since that is the reason we are all here to begin with?

BBM

I believe Misty was the caretaker for the children that day.

I do not believe Haleigh was kidnapped mere feet away from Misty and Misty slept through it.

I absolutely do not believe Ronald Cummings possesses ANYTHING to inspire ANYONE other than maybe his mother and grandmother to be involved in a conspiracy to cover him in the death of his daughter, especially LE.

These 3 things are the foundation of my theory.

 

[Lanie]

It is ridiculous to assume that snitches are following dealers around, but I'm not buying Ron having LE in his back pocket either. This was obviously, IMO, a detailed plan to get both Ron & Misty. I don't think 1 just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. & the same goes for the rest of them. Until I hear differently, from a reliable source, I'll believe they were all targeted. I think it's pointless to compare Ron to Misty...especially if the effort is being made to make one look like a worse person. What does it matter? They're both in prison for trafficking drugs. I also don't believe DCF was doing their jobs, in this case. If they had been as concerned with getting these kids away from guns & drugs, & their teenaged 'stepmom' figure, as they were with them having their own rooms, Haleigh would be alive.

BBM

I think it's pointless and a little strange to compare them where if one is in the wrong, the other is somehow automatically either guiltless or coerced.

For me to say Misty was the 'ringleader' in the drug sting doesn't make Ron her mindless puppet zombie. IMO, Misty and Ron are just as guilty of dealing drugs, it just happens Misty agreed to with an UC while Ron agreed to with Misty. IMO, because Misty was the first with the UC, in the eyes of the law, that is the only reason that makes her the #1, not because she is so skilled, or experienced. Because she was first, she is the one who brought the rest in, and that's it.

All the above, MOO.

 

[1Chump]

Hi 1chump. Glad you rang in here. I'll reply to more later when i get home. For now I want to point out it's my understanding that under Florida's conspiracy laws Misty would have been guilty of trafficking even if she had not beem physically present during the transactions.

References to come.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wasn't saying she could not be charged. I said the cases would be weak.

IMO, they would have a hard time convincing a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that Misty was trafficking drugs and/or a ringleader/mastermind if her only involvement was phone calls with the "buyer" but others were selling the druga and making the money.

 

[lonetraveler]

BBM

I think it's pointless and a little strange to compare them where if one is in the wrong, the other is somehow automatically either guiltless or coerced.

For me to say Misty was the 'ringleader' in the drug sting doesn't make Ron her mindless puppet zombie. IMO, Misty and Ron are just as guilty of dealing drugs, it just happens Misty agreed to with an UC while Ron agreed to with Misty. IMO, because Misty was the first with the UC, in the eyes of the law, that is the only reason that makes her the #1, not because she is so skilled, or experienced. Because she was first, she is the one who brought the rest in, and that's it.

All the above, MOO.

JMO, but I don't think any of these players are guiltless with the exception of Haleigh and Jr. I do however believe that the sentencing in the drug cases were bias and prejudicial and Lady Justice was not wearing a blindfold for a few of the cases. Although I would not want any of these players to enter through my door, I like to think that everyone is entitled to an impartial court and judged and sentenced for the actual crimes they committed and not for crimes that they have not yet been charged. It goes against the constitution to be sentenced for something other than what you are charged with, right? I want the guilty party or parties to be arrested and tried in accordance with the law. It is very disappointing and frustrating that there has been no arrests made for Haleigh's death and disposal.

 

[Crosby87]

I wasn't saying she could not be charged. I said the cases would be weak.

IMO, they would have a hard time convincing a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that Misty was trafficking drugs and/or a ringleader/mastermind if her only involvement was phone calls with the "buyer" but others were selling the druga and making the money.

Exactly. This was clearly what happened in the case involving the UC detective, DB and Misty Croslin and that is why I have an issue with Judge Berger's ruling and the fact Mr. Fields didn't fight to get Misty's case thrown out. Did Judge Berger read and study the Incident Report?

I reviewed the Incident Report on the transaction involving Misty Cummings, Donna Brock and the UC detective; and the detective didn't even clarify who he handed the $800 to and how of that money Misty received before Donna exited the vehicle to drive home supposedly to Orlando. IMO the UC omitted this important detail so he could wrongfully cover-up the facts and charge Misty for drug trafficking.

<snipped>

Cummings entered the front passenger side of the UC vehicle and Donna Brock entered the rear of the UC vehicle. Detective then purchased 155 endocet (oxycodone) pills from Cummings and Brock for $800.00. After the transaction was complete, Brock exited the UC vehicle and Cummings remained inside the UC vehicle so that the detective could drive her home, 116 Tyler Street, Satsuma, FL. Cummings stated that &#8220;she&#8221; (Brock) lives in Orlando. Cummings told the Detective that &#8220;she&#8221; (Brock) needed the money.

Call #4: Cummings said Brock would sell $800 worth of prescription drugs.

It is reasonable to assume from reading this report that all the pills belonged to DB who had the scripts; and Misty got involved only to help out her friend who &#8220;needed the money&#8221;.

When Misty appeared before Judge Berger, the Judge said Misty "liked the money" yet no one TMK clarified exactly how much MC received of the $800. If Misty is to be charged with drug trafficking, isn&#8217;t it imperative for the UC to state in his report and to Judge Berger at the sentencing hearing who he handed the money to and how much Misty received of the $800 before DB left the vehicle? If DB drove home to Orlando after this incident, it is highly unlikely Misty received any of the $800 after the fact.

The IR states the detective gave Misty $100 as a brokerage fee which suggests to me Misty didn't receive any money from the sale of drugs and Donna pocketed it all.

<snipped>

At approximately 0513 hours, Det. and Cummings arrived at 116 Tyler Street, Satsuma, Florida. Det. gave Cummings $100.00 as an additional payment for brokering the transaction with Brock. Cummings thanked Det. and told him that Brock will sell her pills again in three months and told him to call her if he needed any additional pills.


Without knowing exactly how much Misty received of the $800, and based on what is written in this incident report, couldn't it be reasonably argued that Misty only received the brokerage fee of $100.00 and nothing more or the UC wouldn't have felt the need to give her the brokerage fee?


Based on what was written in the IR, Misty is not an inexperienced drug trafficker based on her emotional state at the time, and the fact she willingly gave the UC way too much information. If Misty had known better, she would not have accompanied Donna to this meeting with the detective. MC said repeatedly she did not want to get in trouble but of course the UC hid his real identity from her to trick her. The Judge did not render a fair verdict and I wonder if she truly had a grasp on the real circumstances.

<snipped>

she said she would call him back from another phone. She stated that she did not like to talk on her own phone. Misty called to ensure the detective was en route and was coming alone. Misty Croslin stated that she was all freaked out because this was a lot of pills and a lot of money.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/im...ort.part.1.pdf

 

[Crosby87]

I can't edit my post #231 and correct my error, but I meant to say,

"Misty is not IMO an experienced drug trafficker based on her emotional state at the time and the fact she willingly gave way too much information to the UC cop. "

 

[Lanie]

JMO, but I don't think any of these players are guiltless with the exception of Haleigh and Jr. I do however believe that the sentencing in the drug cases were bias and prejudicial and Lady Justice was not wearing a blindfold for a few of the cases. Although I would not want any of these players to enter through my door, I like to think that everyone is entitled to an impartial court and judged and sentenced for the actual crimes they committed and not for crimes that they have not yet been charged. It goes against the constitution to be sentenced for something other than what you are charged with, right? I want the guilty party or parties to be arrested and tried in accordance with the law. It is very disappointing and frustrating that there has been no arrests made for Haleigh's death and disposal.

Exactly. This was clearly what happened in the case involving the UC detective, DB and Misty Croslin and that is why I have an issue with Judge Berger's ruling and the fact Mr. Fields didn't fight to get Misty's case thrown out. Did Judge Berger read and study the Incident Report?

I reviewed the Incident Report on the transaction involving Misty Cummings, Donna Brock and the UC detective; and the detective didn't even clarify who he handed the $800 to and how of that money Misty received before Donna exited the vehicle to drive home supposedly to Orlando. IMO the UC omitted this important detail so he could wrongfully cover-up the facts and charge Misty for drug trafficking.

<snipped>

Cummings entered the front passenger side of the UC vehicle and Donna Brock entered the rear of the UC vehicle. Detective then purchased 155 endocet (oxycodone) pills from Cummings and Brock for $800.00. After the transaction was complete, Brock exited the UC vehicle and Cummings remained inside the UC vehicle so that the detective could drive her home, 116 Tyler Street, Satsuma, FL. Cummings stated that “she” (Brock) lives in Orlando. Cummings told the Detective that “she” (Brock) needed the money.

Call #4: Cummings said Brock would sell $800 worth of prescription drugs.

It is reasonable to assume from reading this report that all the pills belonged to DB who had the scripts; and Misty got involved only to help out her friend who “needed the money”.

When Misty appeared before Judge Berger, the Judge said Misty "liked the money" yet no one TMK clarified exactly how much MC received of the $800. If Misty is to be charged with drug trafficking, isn’t it imperative for the UC to state in his report and to Judge Berger at the sentencing hearing who he handed the money to and how much Misty received of the $800 before DB left the vehicle? If DB drove home to Orlando after this incident, it is highly unlikely Misty received any of the $800 after the fact.

The IR states the detective gave Misty $100 as a brokerage fee which suggests to me Misty didn't receive any money from the sale of drugs and Donna pocketed it all.

<snipped>

At approximately 0513 hours, Det. and Cummings arrived at 116 Tyler Street, Satsuma, Florida. Det. gave Cummings $100.00 as an additional payment for brokering the transaction with Brock. Cummings thanked Det. and told him that Brock will sell her pills again in three months and told him to call her if he needed any additional pills.


Without knowing exactly how much Misty received of the $800, and based on what is written in this incident report, couldn't it be reasonably argued that Misty only received the brokerage fee of $100.00 and nothing more or the UC wouldn't have felt the need to give her the brokerage fee?


Based on what was written in the IR, Misty is not an inexperienced drug trafficker based on her emotional state at the time, and the fact she willingly gave the UC way too much information. If Misty had known better, she would not have accompanied Donna to this meeting with the detective. MC said repeatedly she did not want to get in trouble but of course the UC hid his real identity from her to trick her. The Judge did not render a fair verdict and I wonder if she truly had a grasp on the real circumstances.

<snipped>

she said she would call him back from another phone. She stated that she did not like to talk on her own phone. Misty called to ensure the detective was en route and was coming alone. Misty Croslin stated that she was all freaked out because this was a lot of pills and a lot of money.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/im...ort.part.1.pdf

I'll admit, it kind of bothers me we have 5 people on video tape selling drugs and they are being perceived as victims while LE and the judicial system are being villianized.

IMO, you are not meaning because some of these people now in prison are being looked at in connection with the disappearance and probable homicide of a little 5-year-old girl, they should be exempt and/or disqualified for being arrested, charged, and sentenced for any other crimes they commit, yet it seems like that IS what you are saying, and I don't get it.

Were at least Ron, Misty, and Tommy being watched by LE because Haleigh is missing and to date still not found? IMO, yes! Because LE was watching these people, did they see an opportunity to get them in a drug sting? IMO, again, yes! Did LE take that opportunity? IMO, yes!! I don't understand how this is wrong. None of these people were forced to deal drugs, IMO, they all seemed quite happy to be doing it. Even Ron, when asked about it, responded he was going to prison, so even Ron, IMO, accepts he was in the wrong. I don't see this as being any more biased than any other reason LE would have for going to the trouble to have a drug sting, as IMO, they don't just randomly set up a sting operation to go after people they don't suspect of being criminals.

As far as the charges they got, while IMO it is possible for LE to have charged them with less than what they did, I don't see anywhere they were charged with more than what they did. If they sold 250 pills, they were charged for 250, not 500. Where is the law that states if a person sells 250 pills, they can only be charged for selling 200? As far as Misty getting or not getting any part of the $800, she did receive a $100 brokerage fee, for BROKERING THE DEAL. Where is the law that states she must receive a certain amount of money above and beyond what she received, or she must receive a certain amount of the payment for the pills in addition to what she received as a brokerage fee?

Using Misty as an example, I personally do not feel her sentence had anything to do with Haleigh. IMO, Misty, with an attorney, did nothing to make a case for herself to qualify for YO program. However, let's say she did. The YO program is at the judge's discretion, it is not mandatory. The judge said she thought about the YO, but it would only be 6 (or 4, I forget), and the judge was not willing to be that lenient on Misty, which only left her with the minimum mandatory, 25 years. The judge could have done the max, 30 years, IIRC, but she did not. What about that? Then we have Hope, who was much, much less involved than Misty, who also did not get YO, and IMO, it is going to be a heck of a stretch to blame that on a Haleigh bias. FTR, I think if anyone should have gotten YO, it would have been Hope, but, IMO, like Misty, even with an attorney, she did nothing to make a judge feel like that was a good choice.

IMO, LE is doing the best they can with what little they have to work with, and IMO, if these people are stupid enough to lay themselves out there and be so careless to get busted in a UC sting, LE is well within their rights to take advantage of it, and I say kudos to them.

All the above is MOO.

 

[Crosby87]

I'll admit, it kind of bothers me we have 5 people on video tape selling drugs and they are being perceived as victims while LE and the judicial system are being villianized.

IMO, you are not meaning because some of these people now in prison are being looked at in connection with the disappearance and probable homicide of a little 5-year-old girl, they should be exempt and/or disqualified for being arrested, charged, and sentenced for any other crimes they commit, yet it seems like that IS what you are saying, and I don't get it.

Were at least Ron, Misty, and Tommy being watched by LE because Haleigh is missing and to date still not found? IMO, yes! Because LE was watching these people, did they see an opportunity to get them in a drug sting? IMO, again, yes! Did LE take that opportunity? IMO, yes!! I don't understand how this is wrong. None of these people were forced to deal drugs, IMO, they all seemed quite happy to be doing it. Even Ron, when asked about it, responded he was going to prison, so even Ron, IMO, accepts he was in the wrong. I don't see this as being any more biased than any other reason LE would have for going to the trouble to have a drug sting, as IMO, they don't just randomly set up a sting operation to go after people they don't suspect of being criminals.

As far as the charges they got, while IMO it is possible for LE to have charged them with less than what they did, I don't see anywhere they were charged with more than what they did. If they sold 250 pills, they were charged for 250, not 500. Where is the law that states if a person sells 250 pills, they can only be charged for selling 200? As far as Misty getting or not getting any part of the $800, she did receive a $100 brokerage fee, for BROKERING THE DEAL. Where is the law that states she must receive a certain amount of money above and beyond what she received, or she must receive a certain amount of the payment for the pills in addition to what she received as a brokerage fee?

Using Misty as an example, I personally do not feel her sentence had anything to do with Haleigh. IMO, Misty, with an attorney, did nothing to make a case for herself to qualify for YO program. However, let's say she did. The YO program is at the judge's discretion, it is not mandatory. The judge said she thought about the YO, but it would only be 6 (or 4, I forget), and the judge was not willing to be that lenient on Misty, which only left her with the minimum mandatory, 25 years. The judge could have done the max, 30 years, IIRC, but she did not. What about that? Then we have Hope, who was much, much less involved than Misty, who also did not get YO, and IMO, it is going to be a heck of a stretch to blame that on a Haleigh bias. FTR, I think if anyone should have gotten YO, it would have been Hope, but, IMO, like Misty, even with an attorney, she did nothing to make a judge feel like that was a good choice.

IMO, LE is doing the best they can with what little they have to work with, and IMO, if these people are stupid enough to lay themselves out there and be so careless to get busted in a UC sting, LE is well within their rights to take advantage of it, and I say kudos to them.

All the above is MOO.

The St. John’s County case involved ONLY Misty Cummings and Donna Brock not RC, HS and TC.

At Donna Brock's sentencing hearing, the incidents involving Ronald Cummings, Tommy Croslin, and Hope Sykes weren't mentioned, so why should the crimes Misty committed in PC be brought up at the hearing in SJC? At the SJC hearing, it seems all of Misty’s charges overlapped and there was no distinction made which isn’t fair IMO.

I am not satisfied with the wording in this incident report. Misty said Donna wanted to sell $800 worth of pills because she needed the money, so if I was Misty’s lawyer I would have asked the detective to clarify the amount he gave to Cummings and Brock because obviously he didn’t hand $800 to Cummings and Brock so what really happened in this transaction is what I want to know.

<snipped>

Cummings entered the front passenger side of the UC vehicle and Donna Brock entered the rear of the UC vehicle. Detective then purchased 155 endocet (oxycodone) pills from Cummings and Brock for $800.00. After the transaction was complete, Brock exited the UC vehicle and Cummings remained inside the UC vehicle so that the detective could drive her home, 116 Tyler Street, Satsuma, FL. Cummings stated that “she” (Brock) lives in Orlando. Cummings told the Detective that “she” (Brock) needed the money.

http://www.allbusiness.com/crime-law-enforcement-corrections/criminal-offenses-sex/15177292-1.html

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/im...ort.part.1.pdf

 

[1Chump]

I'll admit, it kind of bothers me we have 5 people on video tape selling drugs and they are being perceived as victims while LE and the judicial system are being villianized.

IMO, you are not meaning because some of these people now in prison are being looked at in connection with the disappearance and probable homicide of a little 5-year-old girl, they should be exempt and/or disqualified for being arrested, charged, and sentenced for any other crimes they commit, yet it seems like that IS what you are saying, and I don't get it.

Were at least Ron, Misty, and Tommy being watched by LE because Haleigh is missing and to date still not found? IMO, yes! Because LE was watching these people, did they see an opportunity to get them in a drug sting? IMO, again, yes! Did LE take that opportunity? IMO, yes!! I don't understand how this is wrong. None of these people were forced to deal drugs, IMO, they all seemed quite happy to be doing it. Even Ron, when asked about it, responded he was going to prison, so even Ron, IMO, accepts he was in the wrong. I don't see this as being any more biased than any other reason LE would have for going to the trouble to have a drug sting, as IMO, they don't just randomly set up a sting operation to go after people they don't suspect of being criminals.

As far as the charges they got, while IMO it is possible for LE to have charged them with less than what they did, I don't see anywhere they were charged with more than what they did. If they sold 250 pills, they were charged for 250, not 500. Where is the law that states if a person sells 250 pills, they can only be charged for selling 200? As far as Misty getting or not getting any part of the $800, she did receive a $100 brokerage fee, for BROKERING THE DEAL. Where is the law that states she must receive a certain amount of money above and beyond what she received, or she must receive a certain amount of the payment for the pills in addition to what she received as a brokerage fee?

Using Misty as an example, I personally do not feel her sentence had anything to do with Haleigh. IMO, Misty, with an attorney, did nothing to make a case for herself to qualify for YO program. However, let's say she did. The YO program is at the judge's discretion, it is not mandatory. The judge said she thought about the YO, but it would only be 6 (or 4, I forget), and the judge was not willing to be that lenient on Misty, which only left her with the minimum mandatory, 25 years. The judge could have done the max, 30 years, IIRC, but she did not. What about that? Then we have Hope, who was much, much less involved than Misty, who also did not get YO, and IMO, it is going to be a heck of a stretch to blame that on a Haleigh bias. FTR, I think if anyone should have gotten YO, it would have been Hope, but, IMO, like Misty, even with an attorney, she did nothing to make a judge feel like that was a good choice.

IMO, LE is doing the best they can with what little they have to work with, and IMO, if these people are stupid enough to lay themselves out there and be so careless to get busted in a UC sting, LE is well within their rights to take advantage of it, and I say kudos to them.

All the above is MOO.

Above BBM.

I'm sorry but I think you may have misunderstood what many of us are saying. No one has said that they are victims and/or should be exempt for any other crimes.

We were discussing how Misty was treated compared to the others. Misty's sentence seems to have more to do with Haleigh than the drugs. The "brokering" fee comes into play in that fee volunteered by the UC is the only way Misty received any type of benefit beyond "helping a friend." Without the brokering fee, Misty was along for the ride but did not sell the drugs or collect money. So Donna who obtained the prescription, sold the pills and collected $800 received a lessor charge and less time than Misty who received $100 as a finder fee.

IMO, 5 people charged in the same crimes, the two people who benefited the least from the crimes were Hope and Misty. Hope and Misty also were the youngest of the bunch. Misty is the only one without priors and with mitigating factors that should reduce her charges and/or time yet is the only one to receive the maximum charges and time.

IMO, it is more than obvious that Misty and Hope were used by the ones with the prior arrests who had no chance of getting sentenced under the YO statutes. It is also more than obvious that Misty being the key in Haleigh's case played a huge part in why she received tougher changes and sentencing.

IMO, I have not seen anyone say that those 5 are victims of the system and LE/Court are villians. Just that Misty was a "victim" (your word...I would use "dupe") of the adults who used her to sell drugs and/or make money to protect themselves and LE/Courts allowed those adults to get away with it.

 

[Lanie]

The St. John’s County case involved ONLY Misty Cummings and Donna Brock not RC, HS and TC.

At Donna Brock's sentencing hearing, the incidents involving Ronald Cummings, Tommy Croslin, and Hope Sykes weren't mentioned, so why should the crimes Misty committed in PC be brought up at the hearing in SJC? At the SJC hearing, it seems all of Misty’s charges overlapped and there was no distinction made which isn’t fair IMO.

At the time of Misty's sentencing in SJC, Misty had already pleaded 'no contest' to that charge, and also the charges in PC. Do you understand that because Misty pled 'no contest' to these charges, she is no longer considered 'innocent until proven guilty by a court of law' of those charges? Therefore, those charges can be used to determine her sentencing for a separate charge, regardless of whether or not she has been sentenced on those charges yet.

Donna Brock was not charged with the PC crimes, therefore did not plead innocent, guilty, or no contest to those crimes, therefore those crimes have nothing to do with her sentencing.

I am not satisfied with the wording in this incident report. Misty said Donna wanted to sell $800 worth of pills because she needed the money, so if I was Misty’s lawyer I would have asked the detective to clarify the amount he gave to Cummings and Brock because obviously he didn’t hand $800 to Cummings and Brock so what really happened in this transaction is what I want to know.

<snipped>

Cummings entered the front passenger side of the UC vehicle and Donna Brock entered the rear of the UC vehicle. Detective then purchased 155 endocet (oxycodone) pills from Cummings and Brock for $800.00. After the transaction was complete, Brock exited the UC vehicle and Cummings remained inside the UC vehicle so that the detective could drive her home, 116 Tyler Street, Satsuma, FL. Cummings stated that “she” (Brock) lives in Orlando. Cummings told the Detective that “she” (Brock) needed the money.

http://www.allbusiness.com/crime-law-enforcement-corrections/criminal-offenses-sex/15177292-1.html

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/im...ort.part.1.pdf

Again, unless you can show it makes a difference in Misty's charge to have received money from the $800, then it doesn't matter, other than maybe to satisfy personal curiousity.

 

[Lanie]

Above BBM.

I'm sorry but I think you may have misunderstood what many of us are saying. No one has said that they are victims and/or should be exempt for any other crimes.

We were discussing how Misty was treated compared to the others. Misty's sentence seems to have more to do with Haleigh than the drugs. The "brokering" fee comes into play in that fee volunteered by the UC is the only way Misty received any type of benefit beyond "helping a friend." Without the brokering fee, Misty was along for the ride but did not sell the drugs or collect money. So Donna who obtained the prescription, sold the pills and collected $800 received a lessor charge and less time than Misty who received $100 as a finder fee.

IMO, 5 people charged in the same crimes, the two people who benefited the least from the crimes were Hope and Misty. Hope and Misty also were the youngest of the bunch. Misty is the only one without priors and with mitigating factors that should reduce her charges and/or time yet is the only one to receive the maximum charges and time.

IMO, it is more than obvious that Misty and Hope were used by the ones with the prior arrests who had no chance of getting sentenced under the YO statutes. It is also more than obvious that Misty being the key in Haleigh's case played a huge part in why she received tougher changes and sentencing.

IMO, I have not seen anyone say that those 5 are victims of the system and LE/Court are villians. Just that Misty was a "victim" (your word...I would use "dupe") of the adults who used her to sell drugs and/or make money to protect themselves and LE/Courts allowed those adults to get away with it.

There is no proof Misty was used, duped, or victimized by anyone. This is all opinion. There is no proof an 18 year old is incapable of making a few phone calls and scrounging up some drugs to sell without outside interference. Just because someone in that 18 year old's circle is older and has prior convictions does not automatically mean said 18 year old cannot act on her own without that person's manipulation and/or guidance. That, too, is opinion. My opinion is Misty was more than capable of acting on her own. So our opinions differ, and that's fine.

What is not opinion, but is fact, and is on videotape, and has transcripts, is Misty committed a crime. Should you care to look up the Florida statutes of drug trafficking, which is also fact and not opinion, you will find, clearly spelled out, the amount of drugs, the types of drugs, what a person can be charged with, and what the minimum mandatory sentence for that charge will be.

By bringing Donna with her oxy and the UC together with the intention of Donna selling the oxy to the UC, which Misty verifies by telling the UC she is helping out a friend, and cements by accepting $100 from the UC to do it, Misty is (the following bolded by me).
(c)1. Any person who knowingly sells, purchases, manufactures, delivers, or brings into this state, or who is knowingly in actual or constructive possession of, 4 grams or more of any morphine, opium, oxycodone, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, or any salt, derivative, isomer, or salt of an isomer thereof, including heroin, as described in s. 893.03(1)(b), (2)(a), (3)(c)3., or (3)(c)4., or 4 grams or more of any mixture containing any such substance, but less than 30 kilograms of such substance or mixture, commits a felony of the first degree, which felony shall be known as "trafficking in illegal drugs," punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. If the quantity involved:
a. Is 4 grams or more, but less than 14 grams, such person shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of 3 years, and the defendant shall be ordered to pay a fine of $50,000.
b. Is 14 grams or more, but less than 28 grams, such person shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of 15 years, and the defendant shall be ordered to pay a fine of $100,000.
c. Is 28 grams or more, but less than 30 kilograms, such person shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of 25 calendar years and pay a fine of $500,000.

http://www.thelawman.net/PracticeAreas/Florida-Drug-Trafficking-Statutes.asp

These are the facts I am basing my opinions on. Please, in what way was the court biased? How was Misty charged and/or sentenced with a crime she didn't commit? Where in the above does it state a person must partake of the money paid for drugs to be charged and found guilty of drug trafficking? Where does it state a person must be acting alone, and/or not under the influence of someone else, or a person must have priors, or a person aged 18 does not qualify?

 

[twall]

There is no proof Misty was used, duped, or victimized by anyone. This is all opinion. There is no proof an 18 year old is incapable of making a few phone calls and scrounging up some drugs to sell without outside interference. Just because someone in that 18 year old's circle is older and has prior convictions does not automatically mean said 18 year old cannot act on her own without that person's manipulation and/or guidance. That, too, is opinion. My opinion is Misty was more than capable of acting on her own. So our opinions differ, and that's fine.

What is not opinion, but is fact, and is on videotape, and has transcripts, is Misty committed a crime. Should you care to look up the Florida statutes of drug trafficking, which is also fact and not opinion, you will find, clearly spelled out, the amount of drugs, the types of drugs, what a person can be charged with, and what the minimum mandatory sentence for that charge will be.

By bringing Donna with her oxy and the UC together with the intention of Donna selling the oxy to the UC, which Misty verifies by telling the UC she is helping out a friend, and cements by accepting $100 from the UC to do it, Misty is (the following bolded by me).
(c)1. Any person who knowingly sells, purchases, manufactures, delivers, or brings into this state, or who is knowingly in actual or constructive possession of, 4 grams or more of any morphine, opium, oxycodone, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, or any salt, derivative, isomer, or salt of an isomer thereof, including heroin, as described in s. 893.03(1)(b), (2)(a), (3)(c)3., or (3)(c)4., or 4 grams or more of any mixture containing any such substance, but less than 30 kilograms of such substance or mixture, commits a felony of the first degree, which felony shall be known as "trafficking in illegal drugs," punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. If the quantity involved:
a. Is 4 grams or more, but less than 14 grams, such person shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of 3 years, and the defendant shall be ordered to pay a fine of $50,000.
b. Is 14 grams or more, but less than 28 grams, such person shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of 15 years, and the defendant shall be ordered to pay a fine of $100,000.
c. Is 28 grams or more, but less than 30 kilograms, such person shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of 25 calendar years and pay a fine of $500,000.

http://www.thelawman.net/PracticeAreas/Florida-Drug-Trafficking-Statutes.asp

These are the facts I am basing my opinions on. Please, in what way was the court biased? How was Misty charged and/or sentenced with a crime she didn't commit? Where in the above does it state a person must partake of the money paid for drugs to be charged and found guilty of drug trafficking? Where does it state a person must be acting alone, and/or not under the influence of someone else, or a person must have priors, or a person aged 18 does not qualify?

Thank you for looking up the statute and saving me the time to do so!
I too wanted to point out the constructive possession clause in the statute.
It doesn't make a difference if the uc wrote in the report who he handed the money to, Misty was guilty by association (my term, lol) and they have the whole thing on tape. Misty knew what was going on, she set up the deal so she is trafficking drugs!

 

[1Chump]

There is no proof Misty was used, duped, or victimized by anyone. This is all opinion. There is no proof an 18 year old is incapable of making a few phone calls and scrounging up some drugs to sell without outside interference. Just because someone in that 18 year old's circle is older and has prior convictions does not automatically mean said 18 year old cannot act on her own without that person's manipulation and/or guidance. That, too, is opinion. My opinion is Misty was more than capable of acting on her own. So our opinions differ, and that's fine.

What is not opinion, but is fact, and is on videotape, and has transcripts, is Misty committed a crime. Should you care to look up the Florida statutes of drug trafficking, which is also fact and not opinion, you will find, clearly spelled out, the amount of drugs, the types of drugs, what a person can be charged with, and what the minimum mandatory sentence for that charge will be.

By bringing Donna with her oxy and the UC together with the intention of Donna selling the oxy to the UC, which Misty verifies by telling the UC she is helping out a friend, and cements by accepting $100 from the UC to do it, Misty is (the following bolded by me).
(c)1. Any person who knowingly sells, purchases, manufactures, delivers, or brings into this state, or who is knowingly in actual or constructive possession of, 4 grams or more of any morphine, opium, oxycodone, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, or any salt, derivative, isomer, or salt of an isomer thereof, including heroin, as described in s. 893.03(1)(b), (2)(a), (3)(c)3., or (3)(c)4., or 4 grams or more of any mixture containing any such substance, but less than 30 kilograms of such substance or mixture, commits a felony of the first degree, which felony shall be known as "trafficking in illegal drugs," punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. If the quantity involved:
a. Is 4 grams or more, but less than 14 grams, such person shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of 3 years, and the defendant shall be ordered to pay a fine of $50,000.
b. Is 14 grams or more, but less than 28 grams, such person shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of 15 years, and the defendant shall be ordered to pay a fine of $100,000.
c. Is 28 grams or more, but less than 30 kilograms, such person shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of 25 calendar years and pay a fine of $500,000.

http://www.thelawman.net/PracticeAreas/Florida-Drug-Trafficking-Statutes.asp

These are the facts I am basing my opinions on. Please, in what way was the court biased? How was Misty charged and/or sentenced with a crime she didn't commit? Where in the above does it state a person must partake of the money paid for drugs to be charged and found guilty of drug trafficking? Where does it state a person must be acting alone, and/or not under the influence of someone else, or a person must have priors, or a person aged 18 does not qualify?

I'm not talking generalities about what an 18 is or is not capable of doing. I'm limited my discussion to Misty and the facts in the incident reports.

There is evidence that Misty was incapable of "scrounging up some drugs to sell without outside interference. Misty NEVER went to get the drugs on her own. Misty was always accompanied by someone older with prior arrests. That older person with prior arrests was ALWAYs the one who got out of the UC's car with the money that was paid specifically for the drugs.

I have NEVER said that Misty did not commit a crime.

As far as having an opinion about Misty being capable of acting on her own. I have not discussed any opinion about Misty acting alone because the incident reports clearly state that she never did act alone.

 

[kant]

I'm not talking generalities about what an 18 is or is not capable of doing. I'm limited my discussion to Misty and the facts in the incident reports.

There is evidence that Misty was incapable of "scrounging up some drugs to sell without outside interference. Misty NEVER went to get the drugs on her own. Misty was always accompanied by someone older with prior arrests. That older person with prior arrests was ALWAYs the one who got out of the UC's car with the money that was paid specifically for the drugs.

I have NEVER said that Misty did not commit a crime.

As far as having an opinion about Misty being capable of acting on her own. I have not discussed any opinion about Misty acting alone because the incident reports clearly state that she never did act alone.

YES!


....and there it is...


moo