General theory thread and motives rehashed #3

[krkrjx]

Of the three, my bet would be on Tommy as being the least culpable. I just cannot see anyone caring enough about Tommy to take the heat for him for this long.

Misty still has hopes of getting some relief on appeal. Tommy too, for that matter. The appeals process can be lengthy but Tommy does stand a chance with this process. He got more than the minimum mandatory--a lot more! Maybe the court can justify that but if it can't, the appeals court will rule in Tommy's favor.

Misty has less of a chance, yet I believe she is still hopeful of relief coming through her appeals. If that doesn't happen for her, she will become a lot less comfortable in prison.

As long as Misty has any hope that she will get out early, she will remain mute, but if her appeals are all denied and reality sinks in that she will sit there for another 20+ years, Misty will be left with no choice but to cooperate. IMO, if Misty's appeals are all denied and she still doesn't talk, it's because she is in too deep herself to rat out anyone else, and not because she doesn't know anything.

 

[Chablis]

Of the three, my bet would be on Tommy as being the least culpable. I just cannot see anyone caring enough about Tommy to take the heat for him for this long.

Misty still has hopes of getting some relief on appeal. Tommy too, for that matter. The appeals process can be lengthy but Tommy does stand a chance with this process. He got more than the minimum mandatory--a lot more! Maybe the court can justify that but if it can't, the appeals court will rule in Tommy's favor.

Misty has less of a chance, yet I believe she is still hopeful of relief coming through her appeals. If that doesn't happen for her, she will become a lot less comfortable in prison.

As long as Misty has any hope that she will get out early, she will remain mute, but if her appeals are all denied and reality sinks in that she will sit there for another 20+ years, Misty will be left with no choice but to cooperate. IMO, if Misty's appeals are all denied and she still doesn't talk, it's because she is in too deep herself to rat out anyone else, and not because she doesn't know anything.

Misty told Tommy AFTER the fact, and thats why Ron threatened him with a rat, and then after that they became friends, something they were not before.

 

[Nonni Brenda]

There are two witnesses that gave sworn statements that were taped to law enforcement. They were both questioned by Detective Peggy Cone early on in the case.

Those two witnesses claim that Ron was not at work the night Haleigh went missing. Those two witnesses claim that while the EVENING NEWS WAS ON, Ronald Cummings was at one of their homes, ranting, raving, asking for money, and waving around a handgun.

Ron was talking about robbing a crack dealer... These two individuals thought he was crazy, didn't give Ronald money, and went back in to finish the news. One of them even made the statement that they were gonna see Ron on the news one day. They woke up the next morning and they watched Ronald on the news crying about his missing child.

Law enforcement has this information, coupled with information by Ron's co workers at PDM that claimed he was known to sneak out of work.

I have tried to contact one of the witnesses to talk with them myself, but my phone calls were not returned.

Thanks Levi. Just in case you don't know, I really appreciate all you do, and you're not letting Haleigh be forgotten. Your keeping her out there really makes all the difference. Looks like some of the other shows (including Nancy) have forgotton all about this case. Good luck in reaching one of these 2 witnesses. BTW, love your show. Nonni :clap::

 

[Nonni Brenda]

It is called felony murder or party to a crime. The theory is that "the hand of one is the hand of all" or "in for a penny in for a pound." If you are involved in any way, your guilt is identical to the person who actually did the killing.

If any of these players were smart, some of the less culpable would call a meeting with LE, ask for immunity or some sort of deal. Strap up to a polygraph and spill the beans.
I think right now they have called LE's bluff... They would rather go down for drugs than murder. The ones that MAY hold info are that are free, are thinking after two years, they are home free.

What they are to stupid to see is that if they would do this (BBM) it's possible that they could be free NOW, if they would bring Haleigh home. They are :loser:

 

[dodie20]

What they are to stupid to see is that if they would do this (BBM) it's possible that they could be free NOW, if they would bring Haleigh home. They are :loser:

none of them strike me as stupid & they all have lawyers who can explain anything they don't understand. Ron's lawyer, IMO, is pretty decent. He's actually working for Ron & putting forth the effort to keep things from getting worse for his client. Misty's lawyer has so little to work with. LE has dug in their heels where she's concerned & Misty, well she's Misty. I feel sorry for anybody trying to represent her. She's not looking out for her best interest, so how can he? Tommy's lawyer, (is he still with Werter?), works hard, but Tommy lies so much, that for every step forward, he has to take 2 steps back. literally. That guy has dug himself a deep hole. I'm sure every one of them are being advised to keep their mouths shut...which is a shame, because Misty & Tommy were really running off at the mouth for awhile. Granted, most of it was lies, but you never know what treasure will be detected underneath a pile of garbage. MOO.

 

[dodie20]

Levi, on another thread got me to thinking...I remember a statement from Ron's lawyer, pertaining to why he was fired from his job. Ron claimed they had told him he could return on a Monday, but the Friday before that Monday, the offer was withdrawn. & then sometime later, he was officially fired for abandonment. & the plant hired extra security for some reason. IMO, there was good reason for that security. But thinking about this, I can't imagine a business firing a man in his situation for not checking in. IMO, most places would let it slide for at least 6 months. & then LE said they were having technology problems, & then the plant got a new clock in system, & not too long ago, lawyer KP said Ron hadn't been up front about his work hours & also that someone at the plant claimed Ron would leave his kids in the car, while at work. & we still don't know his exact hours. There are several versions out there, including a claim of an 8 hour shift from his preacher. When I consider that this job is Ron's alibi, I don't see how that alibi stands up to scrutiny. MOO.

 

[watchinginky]

Levi, on another thread got me to thinking...I remember a statement from Ron's lawyer, pertaining to why he was fired from his job. Ron claimed they had told him he could return on a Monday, but the Friday before that Monday, the offer was withdrawn. & then sometime later, he was officially fired for abandonment. & the plant hired extra security for some reason. IMO, there was good reason for that security. But thinking about this, I can't imagine a business firing a man in his situation for not checking in. IMO, most places would let it slide for at least 6 months. & then LE said they were having technology problems, & then the plant got a new clock in system, & not too long ago, lawyer KP said Ron hadn't been up front about his work hours & also that someone at the plant claimed Ron would leave his kids in the car, while at work. & we still don't know his exact hours. There are several versions out there, including a claim of an 8 hour shift from his preacher. When I consider that this job is Ron's alibi, I don't see how that alibi stands up to scrutiny. MOO.

BBM

My guess is he was seen either on security camera or by other employees leaving his job while still on the clock. I would consider this abandonment...jmo.

 

[lonetraveler]

There are two witnesses that gave sworn statements that were taped to law enforcement. They were both questioned by Detective Peggy Cone early on in the case.

Those two witnesses claim that Ron was not at work the night Haleigh went missing. Those two witnesses claim that while the EVENING NEWS WAS ON, Ronald Cummings was at one of their homes, ranting, raving, asking for money, and waving around a handgun.

Ron was talking about robbing a crack dealer... These two individuals thought he was crazy, didn't give Ronald money, and went back in to finish the news. One of them even made the statement that they were gonna see Ron on the news one day. They woke up the next morning and they watched Ronald on the news crying about his missing child.

Law enforcement has this information, coupled with information by Ron's co workers at PDM that claimed he was known to sneak out of work.

I have tried to contact one of the witnesses to talk with them myself, but my phone calls were not returned.

:seeya: Hi Levi, glad that you chimed in on this information. I've always been pizzzzzed and suspicious on why LE did not give any credence to these two witnesses' stories. Why do you think that LE has not even considered that this information if investigated properly could lead them to the truth behind Haleigh's disappearche?

 

[lonetraveler]

Just to be clear when I said they claim he was not at work, they claim he was not at work around the time the evening news is on. Around 6 PM.

I do know that there are pings that place Ron at work at around 8 - 8:30 PM.

So he was at work at some point.

But as you can see, holes can be poked in Ron's alibi. Members of the PCSO have even told Ron and his family that. Which is why the relationship between Ron and LE is rocky to say the least.

Yep, Ron had to be at the plant at Dinner Break so that he would be seen eating his supper.

 

[Levi]

:seeya: Hi Levi, glad that you chimed in on this information. I've always been pizzzzzed and suspicious on why LE did not give any credence to these two witnesses' stories. Why do you think that LE has not even considered that this information if investigated properly could lead them to the truth behind Haleigh's disappearche?

From all the information I have gathered. Peggy Cone took them seriously. And I think those two witnesses are the two witnesses, that makes Ron's statements "contradictory." And I think LE may have had them in mind, when they issed the last press release. IMO

 

[Levi]

Levi, on another thread got me to thinking...I remember a statement from Ron's lawyer, pertaining to why he was fired from his job. Ron claimed they had told him he could return on a Monday, but the Friday before that Monday, the offer was withdrawn. & then sometime later, he was officially fired for abandonment. & the plant hired extra security for some reason. IMO, there was good reason for that security. But thinking about this, I can't imagine a business firing a man in his situation for not checking in. IMO, most places would let it slide for at least 6 months. & then LE said they were having technology problems, & then the plant got a new clock in system, & not too long ago, lawyer KP said Ron hadn't been up front about his work hours & also that someone at the plant claimed Ron would leave his kids in the car, while at work. & we still don't know his exact hours. There are several versions out there, including a claim of an 8 hour shift from his preacher. When I consider that this job is Ron's alibi, I don't see how that alibi stands up to scrutiny. MOO.

I think they hired security, so Ron wouldn't be able to try and tamper with witnesses that could poke holes in his alibi.

 

[lil momma]

JMO but it is pretty sad that a large company has to hire security just b/c one employee is known as a bully. It just makes me shake my head.

I have always said it isn't what LE is saying, it is what they are not saying that is important. (read between the lines)

JMO

 

[krkrjx]

JMO but it is pretty sad that a large company has to hire security just b/c one employee is known as a bully. It just makes me shake my head.

I have always said it isn't what LE is saying, it is what they are not saying that is important. (read between the lines)

JMO

Inquiring minds would want to know why the company had to hire security solely because they had fired an employee. I mean, did the company not have security of any kind prior to that? Or, was their security just minimal prior to that? Maybe the reason security had to be hired was that the company reassessed their regular security measures and found them to be lacking. If so, it may have been possible for an employee to be AWOL at times during their scheduled work shift.

RC was fired for job abandonment. It was assumed at the time that it was because he failed to return to work on the agreed-upon return date. However, RC claimed he was terminated from his employment prior to the agreed-upon return date.

If RC was terminated for job abandoment prior to the date he and his employer had agreed upon for his return to work after Haleigh's disappearance, he would have had legal recourse. Yet, he didn't pursue legal action for illegal termination. I question why not.

Could it be that, during the few weeks that Ron was on leave from PDM after Haleigh's disappearance, the company did some research and discovered evidence that Ronald Cummings was not present at the worksite for a portion of one or more of his previous work shifts?

I am not saying Ron left work that night, only that if security there was in fact minimal, he could have.

 

[lil momma]

Inquiring minds would want to know why the company had to hire security solely because they had fired an employee. I mean, did the company not have security of any kind prior to that? Or, was their security just minimal prior to that? Maybe the reason security had to be hired was that the company reassessed their regular security measures and found them to be lacking. If so, it may have been possible for an employee to be AWOL at times during their scheduled work shift.

RC was fired for job abandonment. It was assumed at the time that it was because he failed to return to work on the agreed-upon return date. However, RC claimed he was terminated from his employment prior to the agreed-upon return date.

If RC was terminated for job abandoment prior to the date he and his employer had agreed upon for his return to work after Haleigh's disappearance, he would have had legal recourse. Yet, he didn't pursue legal action for illegal termination. I question why not.

Could it be that, during the few weeks that Ron was on leave from PDM after Haleigh's disappearance, the company did some research and discovered evidence that Ronald Cummings was not present at the worksite for a portion of one or more of his previous work shifts?
I am not saying Ron left work that night, only that if security there was in fact minimal, he could have.

ITA!!!! BINGO :great:

i really think you nailed it!

 

[dodie20]

Inquiring minds would want to know why the company had to hire security solely because they had fired an employee. I mean, did the company not have security of any kind prior to that? Or, was their security just minimal prior to that? Maybe the reason security had to be hired was that the company reassessed their regular security measures and found them to be lacking. If so, it may have been possible for an employee to be AWOL at times during their scheduled work shift.

RC was fired for job abandonment. It was assumed at the time that it was because he failed to return to work on the agreed-upon return date. However, RC claimed he was terminated from his employment prior to the agreed-upon return date.

If RC was terminated for job abandoment prior to the date he and his employer had agreed upon for his return to work after Haleigh's disappearance, he would have had legal recourse. Yet, he didn't pursue legal action for illegal termination. I question why not.

Could it be that, during the few weeks that Ron was on leave from PDM after Haleigh's disappearance, the company did some research and discovered evidence that Ronald Cummings was not present at the worksite for a portion of one or more of his previous work shifts?

I am not saying Ron left work that night, only that if security there was in fact minimal, he could have.

I just wrote a post so similar to this on another thread. Our minds are sure on the same page. IMO, Ron was desperate for that alibi, & the plant, for whatever reason, couldn't give it to him. Ron had a lawyer, so there's no way, imo, that firing went unchallenged. It was his job, to make Ron look as good as possible. This was a terrible blow...but all things considered, it could've been worse, so it's MOO, that Ron's lawyer DID do something on his behalf, & what we heard was the result of negotiations. MOO.

 

[suspicious1]

Levi, on another thread got me to thinking...I remember a statement from Ron's lawyer, pertaining to why he was fired from his job. Ron claimed they had told him he could return on a Monday, but the Friday before that Monday, the offer was withdrawn. & then sometime later, he was officially fired for abandonment. & the plant hired extra security for some reason. IMO, there was good reason for that security. But thinking about this, I can't imagine a business firing a man in his situation for not checking in. IMO, most places would let it slide for at least 6 months. & then LE said they were having technology problems, & then the plant got a new clock in system, & not too long ago, lawyer KP said Ron hadn't been up front about his work hours & also that someone at the plant claimed Ron would leave his kids in the car, while at work. & we still don't know his exact hours. There are several versions out there, including a claim of an 8 hour shift from his preacher. When I consider that this job is Ron's alibi, I don't see how that alibi stands up to scrutiny. MOO.

bbm
I do remember this, Dodie. I could not understand why they would withdraw that offer prior to him returning and then later fire him for abandonment. What if there was speculation that Ron had left work during his shift and LE made it known to PDM? Maybe they didn't want Ron to return until that rumor/speculation had been cleared up....maybe during the investigation LE found it to be true so PDM later had a reason to fire him...job abandonment (leaving work during his shift)....Wasn't this around the time LE wanted to question Ron further and he refused to cooperate? just thinking out loud.

 

[dodie20]

bbm
I do remember this, Dodie. I could not understand why they would withdraw that offer prior to him returning and then later fire him for abandonment. What if there was speculation that Ron had left work during his shift and LE made it known to PDM? Maybe they didn't want Ron to return until that rumor/speculation had been cleared up....maybe during the investigation LE found it to be true so PDM later had a reason to fire him...job abandonment (leaving work during his shift)....Wasn't this around the time LE wanted to question Ron further and he refused to cooperate? just thinking out loud.

That's a real possibility, or maybe they had another valid reason, but Ron's lawyer negotiated & bargained it down to abandonment. People abandon jobs every day, so that wouldn't have been image hurting, but something else might have been. Ron didn't sue & they both backed off each other. maybe PDM was just trying to avoid a costly lawsuit, IDK, but them hiring extra security, spoke volumes, IMO. They didn't want Ron on their property. MOO.

 

[Chablis]

That's a real possibility, or maybe they had another valid reason, but Ron's lawyer negotiated & bargained it down to abandonment. People abandon jobs every day, so that wouldn't have been image hurting, but something else might have been. Ron didn't sue & they both backed off each other. maybe PDM was just trying to avoid a costly lawsuit, IDK, but them hiring extra security, spoke volumes, IMO. They didn't want Ron on their property. MOO.

We also do not see anyone from PDM coming forward on any level, except anonymous. Same as the people the tattoo shop where Ron was BRAGGING about how much money he had gotten since Haleigh went missing. This leads me to believe the LE have asked them to be quiet because they could be called to trial at some point.

 

[krkrjx]

That's a real possibility, or maybe they had another valid reason, but Ron's lawyer negotiated & bargained it down to abandonment. People abandon jobs every day, so that wouldn't have been image hurting, but something else might have been. Ron didn't sue & they both backed off each other. maybe PDM was just trying to avoid a costly lawsuit, IDK, but them hiring extra security, spoke volumes, IMO. They didn't want Ron on their property. MOO.

I am not sure Ron's attorney did much of anything for him regarding his employment situation. IIRC, they claimed this was not their area of expertise and offered Ron the name of a lawyer that could look into the employment situation for him.

It's hard to know for sure what happened with Ron's job so of course all any of us can do is speculate, but even when a lawyer made a statement about the work hours, it was in a way that avoided a direct response to the question. Lawyers are usually pretty good at skirting the issue and avoiding elaborating any more than they absolutely have to, and Shoemaker seems quite skilled in this regard, IMO.

Even if Ron was fired for another reason, the reason that was floated was that it was for abandonment. It was said that Ron had been on leave from work since mid-February and was eventually fired because he had not contacted the employer even once in all that itme about his intention to return to his job, and that they could not hold his position open any longer. Sounds plausible, right? So plausible that it was assumed everyone would buy that explanation without question, and most did not question it.

Well, I must question it, because no one--NO ONE, has ever once flat-out stated Ron's work hours. Everyone skirts the issue: "...he left the house at around 4:30, and was captured on store video after his shift..."

LE has never stated Ron's actual work hours. Ron, his attorney, and no one in Ron's family have ever stated his actual work hours. PDM has never confirmed actual work hours. Even when Nancy Grace specifically asked Shoemaker what hours Ron worked that night, his response was what time Ron left the house, that he was normally 45 minutes early for his shift, that he was seen on break during the work shift (no specific time given for the break, of course), etc. But Shoemaker has never stated the actual hours Ron worked that night, even when asked the question specifically.

Ronald Cummings has referred to his work hours that night as starting his shift at "such and such time" and leaving work at "such and such time." Yet he gives an EXACT TIME for his stop at the convenience store, and an EXACT TIME for his arrival home from work to find Misty in the doorway, has even stated the exact time of the 911 call. None of those times have been referred to as "such and such time."

I am not convinced that PDM management is so heartless that they would willingly fire an employee out on family leave just for failing to keep in touch by phone during his leave. Most employers will bend over backwards to accommodate a grieving father of a missing child. MOO is that the employer wanted to be rid of Ronald Cummings for reasons they either chose not to divulge or LE asked them not to divulge.

What is more important to me than Ron's actual work hours is the way the issue has been skirted by EVERYONE. Really, the only benefit of the doubt I was ever able to give Ronald Cummings was the fact that he was reported to be at work from late afternoon 2/9 through the wee hours of 2/10. However, with each skirting of this issue, Ron being at work became less a fact and more just hearsay. IMO, if publishing Ron's PDM time card could help his client, Shoemaker would have done it long ago.

 

[dodie20]

I am not sure Ron's attorney did much of anything for him regarding his employment situation. IIRC, they claimed this was not their area of expertise and offered Ron the name of a lawyer that could look into the employment situation for him.

It's hard to know for sure what happened with Ron's job so of course all any of us can do is speculate, but even when a lawyer made a statement about the work hours, it was in a way that avoided a direct response to the question. Lawyers are usually pretty good at skirting the issue and avoiding elaborating any more than they absolutely have to, and Shoemaker seems quite skilled in this regard, IMO.

Even if Ron was fired for another reason, the reason that was floated was that it was for abandonment. It was said that Ron had been on leave from work since mid-February and was eventually fired because he had not contacted the employer even once in all that itme about his intention to return to his job, and that they could not hold his position open any longer. Sounds plausible, right? So plausible that it was assumed everyone would buy that explanation without question, and most did not question it.

Well, I must question it, because no one--NO ONE, has ever once flat-out stated Ron's work hours. Everyone skirts the issue: "...he left the house at around 4:30, and was captured on store video after his shift..."

LE has never stated Ron's actual work hours. Ron, his attorney, and no one in Ron's family have ever stated his actual work hours. PDM has never confirmed actual work hours. Even when Nancy Grace specifically asked Shoemaker what hours Ron worked that night, his response was what time Ron left the house, that he was normally 45 minutes early for his shift, that he was seen on break during the work shift (no specific time given for the break, of course), etc. But Shoemaker has never stated the actual hours Ron worked that night, even when asked the question specifically.

Ronald Cummings has referred to his work hours that night as starting his shift at "such and such time" and leaving work at "such and such time." Yet he gives an EXACT TIME for his stop at the convenience store, and an EXACT TIME for his arrival home from work to find Misty in the doorway, has even stated the exact time of the 911 call. None of those times have been referred to as "such and such time."

I am not convinced that PDM management is so heartless that they would willingly fire an employee out on family leave just for failing to keep in touch by phone during his leave. Most employers will bend over backwards to accommodate a grieving father of a missing child. MOO is that the employer wanted to be rid of Ronald Cummings for reasons they either chose not to divulge or LE asked them not to divulge.

What is more important to me than Ron's actual work hours is the way the issue has been skirted by EVERYONE. Really, the only benefit of the doubt I was ever able to give Ronald Cummings was the fact that he was reported to be at work from late afternoon 2/9 through the wee hours of 2/10. However, with each skirting of this issue, Ron being at work became less a fact and more just hearsay. IMO, if publishing Ron's PDM time card could help his client, Shoemaker would have done it long ago.

I know abandonment was given as the reason, but Ron's lawyer said that Ron was given an offer to go back on a Monday, (can't remember what Monday), but the Friday before that Monday, the offer was withdrawn. If that's what really happened...that's not abandonment! So, it looks like, as some others have posted, that Ron either abandoned his job that night, or they all 'settled' on the official reason. IDK...but, going back to the beginning of this case, sure brings up a lot of unanswered questions. In hindsight, it shows what a good lawyer, Shoemaker really is. That guy has done his job & then some. So many suspicious issues have been pushed into the background...& this case has become about...Ron the innocent, getting a 'sweet' deal, Tommy the druggie, getting what he deserved, & Misty the mastermind, getting the door slammed in her face. wooaah, somebody needs to put on the brakes. Them going to prison, isn't the end of this case...no matter who all would like it to be. MOO.