General theory thread and motives rehashed #3

[Whisperer]

:great:I am soo glad Papa posted the docs. His explanations are much clearer than mine. Lord knows I have fought this battle for a long time and am glad to see it in black and white. Perhaps now, people will see clearly what many of us have known for a very long time.

........but don't count on it. :needdrink:

 

[LCoastMom]

Every nut was spotting Caylee in Walmarts, gas stations, etc. Same as the Haleigh case.

Airplanes, fast food restaurants - in PR, TX, CA... makes me wonder if CA will ever listen to those tapes and hear just how crazy she sounded.

Funny how those "sightings" suddenly stopped on 12/11/08 - down from what? 'Calls to the A Hotline' coming in every day to hear CA tell it...

And then we have the Cumming's (AS,TN) crew. :banghead: :banghead:

 

[Whisperer]

Afaik, Ron did not make a comment, his lawyer did. And I don't believe his lawyer lied. I believe LE said that. My question is why do some family members believe HaLeigh is alive? Does LE have any evidence? If they do, why doesn't all of her family believe LE??? What evidence?? Why do family members not believe them? A lot of questions.

I think most know she is dead but cannot bring themselves to say it. Very fiew will acknowlege death unless they see the body. In ron's case, IMO, he knew from day one Haleigh was dead. Listen to his comments. He used past tense and made Freudian Slips.

It may be good to re-asses some of those beliefs that Defense Attorneys don't lie. They will twist and bedazzle with their words and their use of the English language. Every word has to be analyzed to figure out what they say about a guilty client.

They make a clear choice to believe their client is being truthful when they know better. They will lie in their defense of their client...

 

[Whisperer]

Airplanes, fast food restaurants - in PR, TX, CA... makes me wonder if CA will ever listen to those tapes and hear just how crazy she sounded.

Funny how those "sightings" suddenly stopped on 12/11/08 - down from what? 'Calls to the A Hotline' coming in every day to hear CA tell it...

And then we have the Cumming's (AS,TN) crew. :banghead: :banghead:

They may have torn a page out of the Cindy playbook. Doesn't it boggle your mind that CA now says Caylee is alive? Whose child did she cremate?

 

[Emeralgem]

I think most know she is dead but cannot bring themselves to say it. Very fiew will acknowlege death unless they see the body. In ron's case, IMO, he knew from day one Haleigh was dead. Listen to his comments. He used past tense and made Freudian Slips.

It may be good to re-asses some of those beliefs that Defense Attorneys don't lie. They will twist and bedazzle with their words and their use of the English language. Every word has to be analyzed to figure out what they say about a guilty client.

They make a clear choice to believe their client is being truthful when they know better. They will lie in their defense of their client...

BBM.. This could very well be the case with Crystal S, and some members of her family. No one wants to admit their child/grandchild is deceased w/o proof, however I'm not buying Ron C, his mother and his grandmother don't know Haleigh is deceased.. IMO they have known this to be fact since February 9, 2009..Them pretending to believe she is still alive in order to cover up the truth of the matter is IMO nothing but a pure act of evil on their part...JMHO

 

[Emeralgem]

Deliberate misdirection? Yes, I think so. I think anything and everything was used to keep LE from investigating a homicide.

ITA. And the charade continues.JMHO

 

[Chablis]

BBM.. This could very well be the case with Crystal S, and some members of her family. No one wants to admit their child/grandchild is deceased w/o proof, however I'm not buying Ron C, his mother and his grandmother don't know Haleigh is deceased.. IMO they have known this to be fact since February 9, 2009..Them pretending to believe she is still alive in order to cover up the truth of the matter is IMO nothing but a pure act of evil on their part...JMHO

Can you imagine if Teresa Neves has known all along, and her and her son went on Maury, backed a factually incorrect dramatic recreation of what happened that night, didnt give the facts that Misty was lying I mean they did not mention cops said Misty was lying,you would think they would have wanted the public to have CORRECT information to find HALEIGH. Why a lot more people aren't up in arms over that is beyond me. Teresa sat there clutching Haleighs doll talking about how sick she was, yet on NG she said Haleigh was healthy, I mean where is Papa to find these and put a video together pointing out her lies?:crazy:

 

[Emeralgem]

Can you imagine if Teresa Neves has known all along, and her and her son went on Maury, backed a factually incorrect dramatic recreation of what happened that night, didnt give the facts that Misty was lying I mean they did not mention cops said Misty was lying,you would think they would have wanted the public to have CORRECT information to find HALEIGH. Why a lot more people aren't up in arms over that is beyond me. Teresa sat there clutching Haleighs doll talking about how sick she was, yet on NG she said Haleigh was healthy, I mean where is Papa to find these and put a video together pointing out her lies?:crazy:

They portrayed her to be gravely ill with lung problems and heart problems... Maury even acknowledged the fact all of her medical problems would certainly complicate the situation, yet when he asked if they believed she was still alive, Teresea Neves stated.."I know she is"...JMHO

 

[Flossie JMO]

Flossie, possibly they did, but I don't remember the bar docs making any reference to whether or not Crystal received a notice of the hearing date almost 4 years earlier.

Why would KP include something that happened years before she even met Crystal in her own defense against the bar complaint?

All I know is what the court documents say. They are posted here. The judge said the notification was mailed, not served, to the wrong address.

That was the only reason the Magistrate mentioned in granting a re hearing.

As for Crystal's pro se response, if you notice it is dated 12/6/2005 which is five days AFTER the hearing and ONE DAY after the Magistrate's ruling was recorded and made public record.

As my post stated, I don't know how Crystal found out about the ruling. It has been suggested that possibly Ronald told her about it, but I don't know.

All I know is what the documents say. I'm by this somewhat like I've noticed you saying in your posts that you don't believe anything unless it comes from LE. These court stamped, recorded documents are about as valid of information as we can get.

This was the part I was referring to Papa, sorry I couldn't post earlier, bolded parts by me:

I ordered the case file in the parties 2005 Paternity case, including having all hearings transcribed. Upon reviewing the court file, I found that my client had not been completely honest with me regarding her involvement in the Paternity proceedings of 2005. The Court file reflected an Affidavit of Service of the original Petition for to Establish Paternity, personally served on Crystal Sheffield. Crystal then missed the Final Hearing, and the Court entered a Final Judgment of Paternity in favor of the Father. Ms. Sheffield then wrote a 10 letter to the Court explaining that she had never been served with the paperwork or a Notice of Hearing. The Court granted a rehearing of the case, and Ms. Sheffield was represented by counsel, Charles Behm, Esq., in those proceedings. At the Final Hearing, Ms. Sheffield's attorney was not in the Courtroom, pursuant to the transcript. The Court took testimony from both parties during the Final Hearing. The testimony reflects that
Crystal did not have a job or job prospects at the time of the trial, that she had used drugs during the relationship, that she had missed twelve (12) recent doctor appointments for the children, that she had no way of
providing medical insurance to the children, that she was living with her mother who financially supported her, that she would need to share a bedroom with one of the children while living with her mother, and that she made few attempts to have timesharing with the children for months after the Father took custody of them due to his concerns with her cocaine use. The Court ruled that the Father be designated primary custodial parent, and that Crystal could visit the children on alternating weekends (with shared holidays). Crystal was imputed minimum wage income for purposes of child support.

Thereafter, Crystal filed exceptions to the General Magistrate's Report, requesting a reconsideration of the ruling. The Court held a hearing on the motion, and denied relief. The Circuit Court Judge then ratified and
approved the Magistrate's Report and Recommendations. Upon reading the court file, I realized that I had not been given thorough or accurate information regarding the procedural history of the paternity action. The
procedures followed by the Court were standard. Crystal had had her day in Court, and had lost - fair and square.

Prior to my coming onboard in the case, Crystal and her family, in an effort to raise her public image, had told numerous media outlets that the only reason that she did not have custody of her children was that she was not served with court papers, and had lost custody by default. Also, she claimed on national television that Ronald had kidnapped the children, and that his family, through their collusion and "connections" in the courthouse, made sure that Ronald retained custody of the children. This claim was simply untrue, and I was wholly unwilling to corroborate their previous version of the court file. I spent numerous meetings with Crystal and her mother, explaining that I could not attest facts that were untrue to the media, or to anyone else.

 

[Chablis]

This was the part I was referring to Papa, sorry I couldn't post earlier, bolded parts by me:

I ordered the case file in the parties 2005 Paternity case, including having all hearings transcribed. Upon reviewing the court file, I found that my client had not been completely honest with me regarding her involvement in the Paternity proceedings of 2005. The Court file reflected an Affidavit of Service of the original Petition for to Establish Paternity, personally served on Crystal Sheffield. Crystal then missed the Final Hearing, and the Court entered a Final Judgment of Paternity in favor of the Father. Ms. Sheffield then wrote a 10 letter to the Court explaining that she had never been served with the paperwork or a Notice of Hearing. The Court granted a rehearing of the case, and Ms. Sheffield was represented by counsel, Charles Behm, Esq., in those proceedings. At the Final Hearing, Ms. Sheffield's attorney was not in the Courtroom, pursuant to the transcript. The Court took testimony from both parties during the Final Hearing. The testimony reflects that
Crystal did not have a job or job prospects at the time of the trial, that she had used drugs during the relationship, that she had missed twelve (12) recent doctor appointments for the children, that she had no way of
providing medical insurance to the children, that she was living with her mother who financially supported her, that she would need to share a bedroom with one of the children while living with her mother, and that she made few attempts to have timesharing with the children for months after the Father took custody of them due to his concerns with her cocaine use. The Court ruled that the Father be designated primary custodial parent, and that Crystal could visit the children on alternating weekends (with shared holidays). Crystal was imputed minimum wage income for purposes of child support.

Thereafter, Crystal filed exceptions to the General Magistrate's Report, requesting a reconsideration of the ruling. The Court held a hearing on the motion, and denied relief. The Circuit Court Judge then ratified and
approved the Magistrate's Report and Recommendations. Upon reading the court file, I realized that I had not been given thorough or accurate information regarding the procedural history of the paternity action. The
procedures followed by the Court were standard. Crystal had had her day in Court, and had lost - fair and square.

Prior to my coming onboard in the case, Crystal and her family, in an effort to raise her public image, had told numerous media outlets that the only reason that she did not have custody of her children was that she was not served with court papers, and had lost custody by default. Also, she claimed on national television that Ronald had kidnapped the children, and that his family, through their collusion and "connections" in the courthouse, made sure that Ronald retained custody of the children. This claim was simply untrue, and I was wholly unwilling to corroborate their previous version of the court file. I spent numerous meetings with Crystal and her mother, explaining that I could not attest facts that were untrue to the media, or to anyone else.

Is there anyway we can ban the Crystal custody stuff, I mean seriously, in hindsight, her participation in what happened at a years ago custody battle does not factor into the crime against Haleigh. Rons actions in this matter do. He is the one who lost the child on his watch and married the girl who cops say is lying. All this tit for tat about Crystal is malicious and obviously agenda filled for whatever reason.

 

[Flossie JMO]

Questions that deserve and shall be answered. It appears at times the case is just going in circles, but in actuality it's evolving, the process and resolution won't be easy to conclude as other cases because of those involved. For me, it's now not only a case of a missing child, but also full of other intentional crimes causing "hands to be dirty" beyond the perpetrator/s.

LE can and should act upon some of the clues, actions and evidence that's been obvious surrounding this case for a while now.

:seeya: To Flossie and all others, good evening~~~~

Hi Kool, good to see you, what other crimes do you think are being committed? What is your theory now?

 

[Kimster]

Tell you what, at this point, if we held back opinions of one side, we'd have to hold them back on the other as well. This forum is unique in that there is way more leeway here than most other forums on WS.

If you guys want us to tighten the screws, we can. Otherwise, continue to state your cases without snark or rudeness and we'll let you do that as long as outrageous rumors are kept to a minimum.

Now let's get back to discussing the case. If you want use to tighten the screws, you are welcome to PM me, Grandmaj or Chicoliving privately and we'll work together on changing things. Up to you guys.

 

[krkrjx]

Is there anyway we can ban the Crystal custody stuff, I mean seriously, in hindsight, her participation in what happened at a years ago custody battle does not factor into the crime against Haleigh. Rons actions in this matter do. He is the one who lost the child on his watch and married the girl who cops say is lying. All this tit for tat about Crystal is malicious and obviously agenda filled for whatever reason.

Just a suggestion: You can curtail it by not responding. The ignore feature is a good thing! It takes two to tango and most citizens will not argue with themselves for long :seeya:

 

[lil momma]

This was the part I was referring to Papa, sorry I couldn't post earlier, bolded parts by me:

The Court took testimony from both parties during the Final Hearing. The testimony reflects that
Crystal did not have a job or job prospects at the time of the trial, that she had used drugs during the relationship, that she had missed twelve (12) recent doctor appointments for the children, that she had no way of
providing medical insurance to the children, that she was living with her mother who financially supported her, that she would need to share a bedroom with one of the children while living with her mother, and that she made few attempts to have timesharing with the children for months after the Father took custody of them due to his concerns with her cocaine use. The Court ruled that the Father be designated primary custodial parent, and that Crystal could visit the children on alternating weekends (with shared holidays). Crystal was imputed minimum wage income for purposes of child support.

Snip ~

Hi Flossie!

Good post!

I just wanted to comment, if i may

This is kinda OT. It is funny (not really) how in the same State but different Counties the judges decision is so very different.

IMO, and only IMOO, if all it took from Ron to gain custody of his children was a job that offered health insurance, and someone to mention that Crystal used coke, it is just mind boggling.

I would have had my son ripped out of my arms years ago. In Broward County, they give custody to the parent who is mostly likely going to allow the benefit of both parents in the childs life. I didn't have a job, his dad did. I had no health insurance for myself, or my child, but with assistance from the state for 1 year, allowed my child the health care he needed. I lived with my parents, and shared a room with my son.

Wouldn't Ron have had to share a room with one of the children anyways? Or the children would had to share a room, one way or another.

My biggest problem with the ruling, and again this is JMO, is Ron telling the judge that he was fearful for the children's lives as Crystal abuses coke, when HE is the one with the record. I mean, it would have taken 5 maybe 10 minutes to look it up.IIRC, Crsytal had one violation on her record, IF the judge would have done a little research, i believe that he would have ruled differently, but again this is JMO

 

[Flossie JMO]

This was the part I was referring to Papa, sorry I couldn't post earlier, bolded parts by me:

The Court took testimony from both parties during the Final Hearing. The testimony reflects that
Crystal did not have a job or job prospects at the time of the trial, that she had used drugs during the relationship, that she had missed twelve (12) recent doctor appointments for the children, that she had no way of
providing medical insurance to the children, that she was living with her mother who financially supported her, that she would need to share a bedroom with one of the children while living with her mother, and that she made few attempts to have timesharing with the children for months after the Father took custody of them due to his concerns with her cocaine use. The Court ruled that the Father be designated primary custodial parent, and that Crystal could visit the children on alternating weekends (with shared holidays). Crystal was imputed minimum wage income for purposes of child support.

Snip ~

Hi Flossie!

Good post!

I just wanted to comment, if i may

This is kinda OT. It is funny (not really) how in the same State but different Counties the judges decision is so very different.

IMO, and only IMOO, if all it took from Ron to gain custody of his children was a job that offered health insurance, and someone to mention that Crystal used coke, it is just mind boggling.
I would have had my son ripped out of my arms years ago. In Broward County, they give custody to the parent who is mostly likely going to allow the benefit of both parents in the childs life. I didn't have a job, his dad did. I had no health insurance for myself, or my child, but with assistance from the state for 1 year, allowed my child the health care he needed. I lived with my parents, and shared a room with my son.

Wouldn't Ron have had to share a room with one of the children anyways? Or the children would had to share a room, one way or another.

My biggest problem with the ruling, and again this is JMO, is Ron telling the judge that he was fearful for the children's lives as Crystal abuses coke, when HE is the one with the record. I mean, it would have taken 5 maybe 10 minutes to look it up.IIRC, Crsytal had one violation on her record, IF the judge would have done a little research, i believe that he would have ruled differently, but again this is JMO

Hi Lil Momma! And thanks!

BBM, ITA it would be mind boggling, and I believe there was more to it, JMO of course, and there are some other items listed up there. I'm glad your parents were able to take you and your son in, family is so important imo

 

[lil momma]

Is there anyway we can ban the Crystal custody stuff, I mean seriously, in hindsight, her participation in what happened at a years ago custody battle does not factor into the crime against Haleigh. Rons actions in this matter do. He is the one who lost the child on his watch and married the girl who cops say is lying. All this tit for tat about Crystal is malicious and obviously agenda filled for whatever reason.

Hi Chablis-

IMO, it is important, b/c had the judge done some background research, we may not be here today discussing HaLeigh's disappearence. ITA about the rest of your post.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

This was the part I was referring to Papa, sorry I couldn't post earlier, bolded parts by me:

I ordered the case file in the parties 2005 Paternity case, including having all hearings transcribed. Upon reviewing the court file, I found that my client had not been completely honest with me regarding her involvement in the Paternity proceedings of 2005. The Court file reflected an Affidavit of Service of the original Petition for to Establish Paternity, personally served on Crystal Sheffield. Crystal then missed the Final Hearing, and the Court entered a Final Judgment of Paternity in favor of the Father. Ms. Sheffield then wrote a 10 letter to the Court explaining that she had never been served with the paperwork or a Notice of Hearing. The Court granted a rehearing of the case, and Ms. Sheffield was represented by counsel, Charles Behm, Esq., in those proceedings. At the Final Hearing, Ms. Sheffield's attorney was not in the Courtroom, pursuant to the transcript. The Court took testimony from both parties during the Final Hearing. The testimony reflects that
Crystal did not have a job or job prospects at the time of the trial, that she had used drugs during the relationship, that she had missed twelve (12) recent doctor appointments for the children, that she had no way of
providing medical insurance to the children, that she was living with her mother who financially supported her, that she would need to share a bedroom with one of the children while living with her mother, and that she made few attempts to have timesharing with the children for months after the Father took custody of them due to his concerns with her cocaine use. The Court ruled that the Father be designated primary custodial parent, and that Crystal could visit the children on alternating weekends (with shared holidays). Crystal was imputed minimum wage income for purposes of child support.

Thereafter, Crystal filed exceptions to the General Magistrate's Report, requesting a reconsideration of the ruling. The Court held a hearing on the motion, and denied relief. The Circuit Court Judge then ratified and
approved the Magistrate's Report and Recommendations. Upon reading the court file, I realized that I had not been given thorough or accurate information regarding the procedural history of the paternity action. The
procedures followed by the Court were standard. Crystal had had her day in Court, and had lost - fair and square.

Prior to my coming onboard in the case, Crystal and her family, in an effort to raise her public image, had told numerous media outlets that the only reason that she did not have custody of her children was that she was not served with court papers, and had lost custody by default. Also, she claimed on national television that Ronald had kidnapped the children, and that his family, through their collusion and "connections" in the courthouse, made sure that Ronald retained custody of the children. This claim was simply untrue, and I was wholly unwilling to corroborate their previous version of the court file. I spent numerous meetings with Crystal and her mother, explaining that I could not attest facts that were untrue to the media, or to anyone else.

From reading the papers Papa posted and now reading what Kim Picazio told the court in her response to the bar complaint I can see Kim Picazio was not completely honest with the courts.

 

[Chablis]

Just a suggestion: You can curtail it by not responding. The ignore feature is a good thing! It takes two to tango and most citizens will not argue with themselves for long :seeya:

I will defend the mother of a missing child that is getting bludgeoned over and over and over again for no good reason. She is a true victim here, sorry,must just be the advocate in me..:waitasec:

 

[lil momma]

Hi Lil Momma! And thanks!

BBM, ITA it would be mind boggling, and I believe there was more to it, JMO of course, and there are some other items listed up there. I'm glad your parents were able to take you and your son in, family is so important imo

ITA there HAS to be more to it. I also agree that Family is SO important, and out of all that has gone down with everything, that is the only positive thing both Crystal and Ron had, was their family. I am not saying they were all honest and loving with one another, but they did get the support from their family.

 

[Flossie JMO]

From reading the papers Papa posted and now reading what Kim Picazio told the court in her response to the bar complaint I can see Kim Picazio was not completely honest with the courts.

I would not be surprised by that. JMO