In your opinion, why do you think Ron and Misty REALLY got married?

[Whisperer]

I guess I missed the part when he told he loved her....wish I had heard it and seen it because I couldn't tell he cared a hoot by observing him.

 

[debs]

Let's be perfectly clear here. An attorney who prefers to take photos and a far-fetched story which was easily proven as fiction to paint an ugly picture on national television of the father is definitely not acting in the best interest of any child, imo. I stand by my statement she was "screaming to the media" and worse...she was screaming to the media like the little boy who cried wolf...again...IMO.

There is no way I believe you have mistaken anything I have said about them getting married. I did not infer it had anything to do with accusations or with CFS visiting them. I happen to think they got married because they do love each other.

You need not like KPs style; I'm not particularly fond of it, either. We both see that event in exactly the same way: A poor judgment call on the part of someone whose stated purpose was to advocate for a child. But you choose to paint it in an off-color way. I disagree with the delivery of YOUR screaming method, yet would refrain from painting you in the ugly light in which you seem to feel free in painting KP.

I have not mistaken anything you have said; you are absolutely correct.


He wants to find Haleigh. I agree.

He doesn't know what happened to her and would give anything to find her. This is your opinion, correct? I will disagree. I will further state that if he would give anything to find her, why does that not include going to LE for that follow up?

He isn't going to marry Misty to prevent her from telling what she knows!! He wants to know anything and everything about Haleigh's disappearance. I'm curious: Are these statements mutually exclusive? He MARRIED Misty by the time you made it (just yesterday). But the day before that wedding, he stood by her decision to walk out of an interview with LE. If he wants to know anything and everything, wouldn't that include knowing what Misty knows? He stated in his honeymoon visit to the Today show that he did not ask her and that he did not know, he was at work. Those actions and that statement do not support this claim of yours.

The only reason he wanted to marry Misty was because he loves her and needed her by his side to make it through this nightmare. They had already planned on getting married...so I guess it wasn't the first time he asked her or they had discussed the matter. It came as no surprise to anyone in either of their families that they wanted to marry. Neither Ronald nor Misty, nor their mothers ever listed this as the reason for them getting married (love). As others have pointed out, there was a litany of reasons; love never one of them. It was not such a surprise, you are correct. But if it was something they wanted to do, why is it Misty's parents ONLY decided to agree after HaLeigh's disappearance? Wuv, twue wuv.......no.

I watched his interviews and believed him when he said it. Good enough for me. I have seen his interviews, too. He has never said he married for love in all of them I've seen. You'll definitely strengthen your argument with an indication or link to where you saw that. However, again, if love was his only reason, a need to have her around for comfort, it was never a stated purpose in the overwhelming need of everyone else to justify the marriage before it happened.

You are dedicated to your adamant defense of Ronald. I admire that, I truly do.

 

[Donjeta]

I watched his interviews and believed him when he said it. Good enough for me.

In which interview did he say those things?

 

[Shaymus at The Rock]

You need not like KPs style; I'm not particularly fond of it, either. We both see that event in exactly the same way: A poor judgment call on the part of someone whose stated purpose was to advocate for a child. But you choose to paint it in an off-color way. I disagree with the delivery of YOUR screaming method, yet would refrain from painting you in the ugly light in which you seem to feel free in painting KP.

I have not mistaken anything you have said; you are absolutely correct.


He wants to find Haleigh. I agree.

He doesn't know what happened to her and would give anything to find her. This is your opinion, correct? I will disagree. I will further state that if he would give anything to find her, why does that not include going to LE for that follow up?

He isn't going to marry Misty to prevent her from telling what she knows!! He wants to know anything and everything about Haleigh's disappearance. I'm curious: Are these statements mutually exclusive? He MARRIED Misty by the time you made it (just yesterday). But the day before that wedding, he stood by her decision to walk out of an interview with LE. If he wants to know anything and everything, wouldn't that include knowing what Misty knows? He stated in his honeymoon visit to the Today show that he did not ask her and that he did not know, he was at work. Those actions and that statement do not support this claim of yours.

The only reason he wanted to marry Misty was because he loves her and needed her by his side to make it through this nightmare. They had already planned on getting married...so I guess it wasn't the first time he asked her or they had discussed the matter. It came as no surprise to anyone in either of their families that they wanted to marry. Neither Ronald nor Misty, nor their mothers ever listed this as the reason for them getting married (love). As others have pointed out, there was a litany of reasons; love never one of them. It was not such a surprise, you are correct. But if it was something they wanted to do, why is it Misty's parents ONLY decided to agree after HaLeigh's disappearance? Wuv, twue wuv.......no.

I watched his interviews and believed him when he said it. Good enough for me. I have seen his interviews, too. He has never said he married for love in all of them I've seen. You'll definitely strengthen your argument with an indication or link to where you saw that. However, again, if love was his only reason, a need to have her around for comfort, it was never a stated purpose in the overwhelming need of everyone else to justify the marriage before it happened.

You are dedicated to your adamant defense of Ronald. I admire that, I truly do.

I disagree that Ron wants to find Haleigh. IMO, he knows where Haleigh is.

 

[LaLaw2000]

I disagree that Ron wants to find Haleigh. IMO, he knows where Haleigh is.

I firmly believe that Ronald knows where Haleigh is also, Shaymus. I have believed it from the first moment I saw him fall to the ground with her picture. Listening to the 911 call just strenghtened my belief. In fact, I have not and do not believe a word that comes out of his mouth.

JMHO

ETA: I have never seen a couple seem less in love, and if looks could kill, Misty would have been struck dead on national TV. I saw the look. JMO.

 

[Blackwatch]

I firmly believe that Ronald knows where Haleigh is also, Shaymus. I have believed it from the first moment I saw him fall to the ground with her picture. Listening to the 911 call just strenghtened my belief. In fact, I have not and do not believe a word that comes out of his mouth.

JMHO

ETA: I have never seen a couple seem less in love, and if looks could kill, Misty would have been struck dead on national TV. I saw the look. JMO.

BBM. ITA. Since when does a parent state, (paraphrase) 'I would give my life to have her life back'? BACK, being the operative word here.

As for love? In my opinion it looks like lust gone wrong, terribly wrong, chaining 2 people together for all the wrong reasons. But, that's just my opinion - I don't like to make my posts sound like facts when they're not.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

You need not like KPs style; I'm not particularly fond of it, either. We both see that event in exactly the same way: A poor judgment call on the part of someone whose stated purpose was to advocate for a child. But you choose to paint it in an off-color way. I disagree with the delivery of YOUR screaming method, yet would refrain from painting you in the ugly light in which you seem to feel free in painting KP.

I have not mistaken anything you have said; you are absolutely correct.


He wants to find Haleigh. I agree.

He doesn't know what happened to her and would give anything to find her. This is your opinion, correct? I will disagree. I will further state that if he would give anything to find her, why does that not include going to LE for that follow up?

He isn't going to marry Misty to prevent her from telling what she knows!! He wants to know anything and everything about Haleigh's disappearance. I'm curious: Are these statements mutually exclusive? He MARRIED Misty by the time you made it (just yesterday). But the day before that wedding, he stood by her decision to walk out of an interview with LE. If he wants to know anything and everything, wouldn't that include knowing what Misty knows? He stated in his honeymoon visit to the Today show that he did not ask her and that he did not know, he was at work. Those actions and that statement do not support this claim of yours.

The only reason he wanted to marry Misty was because he loves her and needed her by his side to make it through this nightmare. They had already planned on getting married...so I guess it wasn't the first time he asked her or they had discussed the matter. It came as no surprise to anyone in either of their families that they wanted to marry. Neither Ronald nor Misty, nor their mothers ever listed this as the reason for them getting married (love). As others have pointed out, there was a litany of reasons; love never one of them. It was not such a surprise, you are correct. But if it was something they wanted to do, why is it Misty's parents ONLY decided to agree after HaLeigh's disappearance? Wuv, twue wuv.......no.

I watched his interviews and believed him when he said it. Good enough for me. I have seen his interviews, too. He has never said he married for love in all of them I've seen. You'll definitely strengthen your argument with an indication or link to where you saw that. However, again, if love was his only reason, a need to have her around for comfort, it was never a stated purpose in the overwhelming need of everyone else to justify the marriage before it happened.

You are dedicated to your adamant defense of Ronald. I admire that, I truly do.

When you take my words out of context, they lose their meaning. I didn't say I heard Ronald state it was for love that he married her. My statement was in regards to what Dr. Know? had mentioned about Ronald discussing wanting Haleigh found and to find the reasons she went missing. I have heard Ronald say those things many times.

Ronald doesn't have to defend himself for marrying Misty. He wouldn't have done it, IMO, without love being the reason. He didn't marry Crystal. He didn't marry Amber. I would imagine a few people wanted to force him to marry Crystal because of the two children, but it didn't happen. This tells me that he was in no way forced to marry Misty either.

Misty walking out of an interview was HER choice and she had a legal right to do so. I would expect him to support her since he feels she has cooperated and there is nothing more to be gained from her. She can't tell them anything new if she knows nothing new (which I believe is the case). If anyone in Ronald's family, especially Ronald himself, had reason to think she was lying to LE...this marriage would not have taken place..IMO.

 

[LillieBelle]

Why on earth would Ron want her to keep her mouth shut?! He wants to find Haleigh. He doesn't know what happened to her and would give anything to find her. He isn't going to marry Misty to prevent her from telling what she knows!! He wants to know anything and everything about Haleigh's disappearance.

The only reason he wanted to marry Misty was because he loves her and needed her by his side to make it through this nightmare. They had already planned on getting married...so I guess it wasn't the first time he asked her or they had discussed the matter. It came as no surprise to anyone in either of their families that they wanted to marry.

I do NOT agree. We see this entirely different. Same info, completely different take on this info... And I want to add- JMHO, because, of course we all have a right to our opinions. I just find it sooo interesting that different people can look at the same thing and see it sooo differently, I find it fascinating.

 

[cuppy199]

Again, not attacting the poster, but I watched every interview too. I saw a violent person. It amazes me there are people who can't see it. How could you be so off in opinion? Hmmm...just baffiling.

Just because someone might not see what you see doesnt mean your opinion is anymore right then theirs:waitasec:

 

[SeriouslySearching]

I do NOT agree. We see this entirely different. Same info, completely different take on this info... And I want to add- JMHO, because, of course we all have a right to our opinions. I just find it sooo interesting that different people can look at the same thing and see it sooo differently, I find it fascinating.

It is fascinating. I respect we don't agree on our perceptions. I try to see beyond what is taking place on the camera and visualize the circumstances surrounding the moment. I try to read between the lines and understand the emotions behind the words or actions. I also analyze what is being put out by certain editors and how they would like the piece to be perceived. Nothing is ever black and white in the media.

 

[lonetraveler]

It is fascinating. I respect we don't agree on our perceptions. I try to see beyond what is taking place on the camera and visualize the circumstances surrounding the moment. I try to read between the lines and understand the emotions behind the words or actions. I also analyze what is being put out by certain editors and how they would like the piece to be perceived. Nothing is ever black and white in the media.

-------------
I will venture out and say that you do not have a monopoly on how to CORRECTLY perceive this tragic situation revolving around Haleigh's disappearance. In my interactions with posters on WS I have found that the vast majority of them appear to be intelligent and have an amazing ability to "read" and "see" as well as "hear" everything being said and published with a non-partial and fair interpretation. Your post seems to suggest that you are apparently the only one who has that ability and that the rest of us just aren't "getting it". I disagree with your posts but I do admire your dedication and loyalty.

 

[debs]

When you take my words out of context, they lose their meaning. I didn't say I heard Ronald state it was for love that he married her. My statement was in regards to what Dr. Know? had mentioned about Ronald discussing wanting Haleigh found and to find the reasons she went missing. I have heard Ronald say those things many times.

Ronald doesn't have to defend himself for marrying Misty. He wouldn't have done it, IMO, without love being the reason. He didn't marry Crystal. He didn't marry Amber. I would imagine a few people wanted to force him to marry Crystal because of the two children, but it didn't happen. This tells me that he was in no way forced to marry Misty either.

Misty walking out of an interview was HER choice and she had a legal right to do so. I would expect him to support her since he feels she has cooperated and there is nothing more to be gained from her. She can't tell them anything new if she knows nothing new (which I believe is the case). If anyone in Ronald's family, especially Ronald himself, had reason to think she was lying to LE...this marriage would not have taken place..IMO.

My dear fellow poster, I took nothing out of context. They were quoted exactly, with my responses following each point. What you have posted here goes far beyond your observation and you are stating it as fact. One can observe, and we should all speculate on that observation, but what you state here as fact goes beyond an observation and wanders into the subjective "what one wants to see" territory.

You cannot know, for instance, whether Ronald would marry for anything less than love. Mentioning Crystal and Amber as your only proof ignores the circumstance in which this marriage DID take place. A missing child. His heart. You don't know the forces which compelled him to marry. None of us do. We can only observe the circumstances. In my mind, they were inappropriate for a wedding. In your mind, the perfect time. We can disagree on that.

A legal right to walk out on an interview does not demonstrate a willingness for cooperation. We both observe that she walked out. We both observe she felt mistreated. We simply view the level of cooperation differently. I find that she should have endured anything to help find her child. You see it as excusable and defensible that she walked out, exercising her right to do so. Ronald sat on Today Show's couch and exclaimed he'd never talked to her about what happened that night. I see that as indefensible, and frankly incredulous. I also do not see that as cooperating. It makes no sense that he wouldn't ask her what happened in order to make it make sense in his head, understand the story, work from that base so as to know or at least hope to know the next step.

When people make jokes about "I was sleeping; I saw 3" Or "I was at work" it goes beyond the joke to express that incredulity one is asked to ignore. I cannot ignore it. Elephants in the living room are impossible to ignore.

 

[Patty G]

Not everyone in this world is going to see a situation in the same format. This is what makes the minds of people very interesting. I could see something one way, and someone could see it in a totally different way. This doesn't make my thought pattern wrong or the other person's thought pattern wrong. This is just the way it is in life.

If we all thought the same way, this world would be boring!

The only people that truly know what happened regarding marriage etc., are the people involved. None of us can read their minds on why they did what they did. All we can do is speculate on why it happened.

When we view the personality of "players" in this case, some of us may see it based on situations in our own lives.

Posters can disagree with the posts however, be respectful of the other posters thought patterns.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

My dear fellow poster, I took nothing out of context. They were quoted exactly, with my responses following each point. What you have posted here goes far beyond your observation and you are stating it as fact. One can observe, and we should all speculate on that observation, but what you state here as fact goes beyond an observation and wanders into the subjective "what one wants to see" territory.

You cannot know, for instance, whether Ronald would marry for anything less than love. Mentioning Crystal and Amber as your only proof ignores the circumstance in which this marriage DID take place. A missing child. His heart. You don't know the forces which compelled him to marry. None of us do. We can only observe the circumstances. In my mind, they were inappropriate for a wedding. In your mind, the perfect time. We can disagree on that.

A legal right to walk out on an interview does not demonstrate a willingness for cooperation. We both observe that she walked out. We both observe she felt mistreated. We simply view the level of cooperation differently. I find that she should have endured anything to help find her child. You see it as excusable and defensible that she walked out, exercising her right to do so. Ronald sat on Today Show's couch and exclaimed he'd never talked to her about what happened that night. I see that as indefensible, and frankly incredulous. I also do not see that as cooperating. It makes no sense that he wouldn't ask her what happened in order to make it make sense in his head, understand the story, work from that base so as to know or at least hope to know the next step.

When people make jokes about "I was sleeping; I saw 3" Or "I was at work" it goes beyond the joke to express that incredulity one is asked to ignore. I cannot ignore it. Elephants in the living room are impossible to ignore.

Ronald didn't need to ask because she already told him everything she could remember about that night. He obviously doesn't doubt her.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

-------------
I will venture out and say that you do not have a monopoly on how to CORRECTLY perceive this tragic situation revolving around Haleigh's disappearance. In my interactions with posters on WS I have found that the vast majority of them appear to be intelligent and have an amazing ability to "read" and "see" as well as "hear" everything being said and published with a non-partial and fair interpretation. Your post seems to suggest that you are apparently the only one who has that ability and that the rest of us just aren't "getting it". I disagree with your posts but I do admire your dedication and loyalty.

I assure you it wasn't meant to sound that way. I mentioned it because it is the way I go about things is all. I simply don't take those things at face value. There are fabulous and intelligent posters all over this board who view things much in the same way and we still can see things totally opposite.

 

[stilettos]

Ronald didn't need to ask because she already told him everything she could remember about that night. He obviously doesn't doubt her.

Ronald does not have to ask her what happened (IMO, IMO, IMO) he knows exactly what happened to HaLeigh and instructed Misty what to say to authorities. She keeps forgetting the script she was given.

 

[debs]

Ronald didn't need to ask because she already told him everything she could remember about that night. He obviously doesn't doubt her.

But that isn't what he said. He was asked directly if he had talked to Misty about the events that night and he replied that he had not.

 

[Pondering Mind]

But that isn't what he said. He was asked directly if he had talked to Misty about the events that night and he replied that he had not.

That is what I recall too debs....and may I add, that statement alone speaks volumes to me! I would think that during and immediatly following the 911 call, Ron would be grilling Misty for a minute by minute account of that evening. IMVHO, why would a father (or anyone in that situation) NOT be doing that...unless he already knew? Just sayin and jmo.....:waitasec:

 

[Shaymus at The Rock]

Yes, that was an amazing statement from the father of a missing child. It's hard to fathom.

 

[Dr. Know?]

I watched his interviews and believed him when he said it. Good enough for me.

Okay, Where did my post stating the exact opposite of SS go? Thanks guys. I appreciate the welcome. I mean the mods or whoever is removing posts. Haven't posted in 2 days and now I have 3 gone? What did I do wrong or fill me in if we need to staighten up for LE. geez......