Misty makes shocking claims on the Early Show 2009.10.9. -*video inlcuded*

[Donjeta]

I'm not so surprised that Misty is, in general, sticking to her story (in its conflicting parts). And she hasn't fooled anyone. The police have publicly said that her stories are conflicting and she hasn't told all that she knowsas the above quote states, "her accounts and the physical evidence don't add up." No one can force her to tell the truth. Legally, she can't be made to incriminate herself, if she's done something illegal or negligent. All she has to do is refuse to talk.

I totally agree with you.

I don't understand why we keep coming up with the same argument about Misty fooling the finest minds in LE over and over again when LE has made it abundantly clear that they believe her story is bunk. How is that fooling anybody?

 

[Whisperer]

To tell youo the truth, I don't feel the LE have any warm fuzzies with RC either. I think they are even more suspicious of him. RC knows to keep his mouth shut around police. He seals his lips when he is around them. Heck, look at the night Haleigh disappeared, he couldn't help them one little bit.

He had his mom and misty do the talking for him...

He wouldn't need an attorney if he didn't do anything. Exactly how many INNOCENT fathers of missing children have several attorneys hanging around them and speaking for them in the media?

 

[Whisperer]

I bet Misty and RC were together over the weekend. Anyone buying that RC stayed home because JR was sick?....GMAB!

 

[Whisperer]

In reference to post #93, when did LE confirm Ron picked up Haleigh from the bus stop? The only confirmation I know about is TN confirming it. How the heck would she know?...she doesn't even live close by..

Another example of TN manipulating our facts and protecting her son.

Concering the two parents....why is it being assumed they were together in the same car at all times? I have spent many years at bus stops and parents do a lot of socializing and not always with each other. They do get out of cars at times and they do talk to different people.

 

[nostoneunturned]

If Misty,doesn't know what happened and she was asleep..anyone could have taken advantage of this situation.
The railroad reference..the water that is behind the home.
I wish these people weren't causing drama everyday...and give full attention to this lovely child that is missing!

 

[Whisperer]

I read on the previous page that somebody thinks Crystals side of the family has her and is being hidden. For those who think she is alive and being taken car of, they better hope she is living with an extremely wealthy family. The cost of the humatrope, which should be getting started about now is between $20,000 and $40,000 a year.

 

[Normcar21]

Really? Referencing Misty Croslin-Cummings’ hypnosis session allow me to point out portions of her version of events that IMO are NOT clear or distinct, and are contradictory.


Who took Haleigh to school on 2/9?


Who picked Haleigh up at the bus stop?



How does a five year old pop or try to pop wheelies on a bicycle with training wheels?

Misty has told three different versions of what Haleigh wearing when last seen



Misty has changed the story as to what time she woke up.


Misty told a different version of when she noticed the kitchen light was on


Where was Misty at when she noticed the back door open? The living room or the kitchen?


Was the back door “open” or “wide open”?


How could it be “wide open”? The door is shown to be self closing in this video:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/crime/2009/03/06/ng.haleigh.home.cnn

IMO when Putnam County Sheriff's Major Gary Bowling stated the following about Misty Croslin-Cummings, these are likely only a small portion of what he referenced:

You have a whole lot of information here that has serious flaws but I do not have time to address them tonight because I need to go to work tomorrow...dang. However, I promise you that I "will" address your conclusions, especially eye witness accounts of clothing and your seeming idea that it is contradictory, as well as the training wheel "wheely" thing that another poster has already addressed.

Stay tuned:woohoo:

 

[Normcar21]

I have to honestly say that I need to go against the grain with the majority of you.

Misty may or MAY NOT, have anything to do with the disappearance of Haleigh.

I do believe she has a reasonable claim against the mother's family, and the mother. I think if we keep tunnel vision on Misty in this case we wont find the answers.

If we widen our horizons and think a little about the claim maybe we can figure out more to the puzzle, and maybe not. But I do think if the answers were with Misty they would have been out already. There is no solid evidence against Misty in this case. There may be evidence against other individuals if we look into it. I just think that it would be important to remember that real life doesn't work like we see on television. People do display emotions different then it is televised and different from other people. I think if Misty's story has slight variances it could also be because she was in agony of losing this precious child. From every person who has witnessed the relationship between the kids and Misty it does sound like she likes the kids. I don't see any motive here. It's probably why a lot of people are thinking about neglect, but I just don't see it. In my opinion, we would have heard something already if it was just a case of neglect.

And the lie detector tests (the polygraphs) don't really prove anything. If you google accuracy about a polygraph test you will come to realize how invaluable they are.

So why not just look into other leads?

Haleigh's biological mother obviously did not care one cent about her children before Haleigh went missing. She is thousands of dollars behind in child support. I'm just wondering have we made a topic to discuss possible other leads in this case and follow up on the mother lead? There is tons of information about her on the internet. Even just seeing her myspace page before she changed it...

Here's a place to start investigating --
http://***************.com/WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY.htm

If I was the type of person to point fingers, Misty would be the last place I would be pointing. The other leads are just more of a "wow" factor. But I think it is just critical the media lay off Misty and stop giving the public tunnel vision. It's gruesome if we are destroying a young lady's life that already looks pretty torn up. I just wish I would see more theory's being gone over and discussed.

My response to you: I agree, finally, a voice of reason and not simply a sheep "following the media goat"

Applause:woohoo:

Time for snoozing, what a great post, IMO, thanks, that will make my sleep less nasty. The voice of individual reason is always, to me, soothing. I find a tiny string of hope within a maze of media inculcation and propaganda

 

[Donjeta]

Misty is the last person to see Haleigh. She has changed her story. She has been inconsistent. The police say they have physical evidence that contradicts her story. They called her story sketchy and a farce. She has failed several LDTs. Her family has indicated they think she's holding something back. In other words, she's a liar.

I hope someone can explain to me why it should be considered a voice of reason to think that she must be completely innocent and does not know anything.

If she's innocent and an unknown perp took Haleigh, why is she lying?

 

[Normcar21]

Misty is the last person to see Haleigh. She has changed her story. She has been inconsistent. The police say they have physical evidence that contradicts her story. They called her story sketchy and a farce. She has failed several LDTs. Her family has indicated they think she's holding something back. In other words, she's a liar.

I hope someone can explain to me why it should be considered a voice of reason to think that she must be completely innocent and does not know anything.

If she's innocent and an unknown perp took Haleigh, why is she lying?

She's almost a kid
She's confused and feeling picked on
She has brothers and parents who have no sense of family solidarity, something that clearly, to me, indicates that she has been going through a whole lotta nasty throughout her life
She is being picked on by professional adults who are trained in things like lie detection, hypnosis, picking on every jot and tittle of what she says.
She is in love with her husband but all of this exposure has put all of that on hold, he was probably the first incidence of real love and trust that she ever experienced and now he's abandoning her because he is being coerced by NG and other trained adult pros
She is probably telling, as you call it LIES because she is young, confused, trying to make sense of things when all around her she is being challenged by every tiny thing that comes from her mouth.

Have you ever been picked on? When young? How did your objective reality and mind sense work when being picked on by the bullies? And the bullies told you that you lied, and then you tried to defend yourself and the bullies jumped on you again.

No wonder she's failing all of this crap, she is very young, picked on by the world, and probably feeling like the whole world is against her. Rejected by any and all support systems that she once had, as flimsy and feeble as they may have been.

My hope is that one or two of y'all who ignore the above considerations will some day be confronted with even one iota of what she is no doubt going through. The scarlet letter enforce. :furious:

 

[KOOL LOOK]

Misty is the last person to see Haleigh. She has changed her story. She has been inconsistent. The police say they have physical evidence that contradicts her story. They called her story sketchy and a farce. She has failed several LDTs. Her family has indicated they think she's holding something back. In other words, she's a liar.

I hope someone can explain to me why it should be considered a voice of reason to think that she must be completely innocent and does not know anything.

If she's innocent and an unknown perp took Haleigh, why is she lying?

and yet on NG tonight, it was mentioned by NG and confirmed by her guests that "Misty is not a suspect".

LE is trying to make the shoe fit, it's not sliding on. Yet, LE has not come out and detailed specifically one lie Misty has told. I'm not directing my post at you D, just the part about answering with my no suspect response.

Lets see what Mama Croslin has to say. Everyone is riding high on her now being incarcerated, waiting on the big bombshell. Supposedly according to NG, she is being questioned and interviewed by police as we speak. Why even Art knew exactly what LE was going to ask, expect Lisa Croslin to do with Misty's statements before and after, and compare them to her story told to her by Misty. Just wow, how does Art have all this inside information from LE.

And why is no one questioning where he's getting his information from? He's not even the news media, licensed to report on news of interest to the public. The tax paying public who has an interest in crime and who LE is accountable too. Why is he having all the scoop and from whom?

I want to know how he knows in such details what LE is doing with Lisa Croslin this night! He laid it out very detailed, spoke as authority in knowing what he was saying. He was too sure of himself to me. LE should not be divulging any inside investigative techniques to Art Harris. Nor should they be disclosing how and what they plan on expecting of Lisa Croslin.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Normcar, you make a lot of good points, to which I would add that she has had apparently very little moral training while suffering considerable abuse of various kinds and thus has learned (wrongly, of course) that lying to protect herself is a useful tool. (For example, children often learn to lie to protect their abusive parents or deflect the suspicions of teachers and other authority figures. They fear losing the only home they have, even if it is an emotionally barren and abusive one).

The whole "undercover sting" debacle troubled me greatly because Misty already feels abandoned and betrayed by her mother and brother, her husband is divorcing her, and now her new "friend" turns out to be a big fake working 24/7 to betray her trust. I feel profoundly sorry for this young girl.

That said, she reminds me of some of the Charlie Manson girls who went along with Charlie's evil schemes and then ended up spending their lives in prison, long after they grew up enough to see how stupid and cruel and vicious they had been and really understand the consequences of what they had done. Now, that comparison is not meant to suggest that Misty murdered Haleigh, because I have no idea what she did, what she is hiding, or what she is lying about. I just want to point out that Misty's situation is ALSO a result of her OWN poor choices; all of her other circumstances don't excuse failing to tell the truth, the whole truth, about the day and night of Haleigh's disappearance. And of course Haleigh is too young to have had the luxury of choice.

 

[Tom'sGirl]

snipped

I want to know how he knows in such details what LE is doing with Lisa Croslin this night! He laid it out very detailed, spoke as authority in knowing what he was saying. He was too sure of himself to me. LE should not be divulging any inside investigative techniques to Art Harris. Nor should they be disclosing how and what they plan on expecting of Lisa Croslin.

LOL, I take Art for what he is, a Blogger! He's stated things in the past and then gone back and retracted them while posters are still discussing his original info. in his own Forum.

 

[Normcar21]

Really? Referencing Misty Croslin-Cummings’ hypnosis session allow me to point out portions of her version of events that IMO are NOT clear or distinct, and are contradictory.


Who took Haleigh to school on 2/9?


Who picked Haleigh up at the bus stop?



How does a five year old pop or try to pop wheelies on a bicycle with training wheels?

Misty has told three different versions of what Haleigh wearing when last seen



Misty has changed the story as to what time she woke up.


Misty told a different version of when she noticed the kitchen light was on


Where was Misty at when she noticed the back door open? The living room or the kitchen?


Was the back door “open” or “wide open”?


How could it be “wide open”? The door is shown to be self closing in this video:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/crime/2009/03/06/ng.haleigh.home.cnn

IMO when Putnam County Sheriff's Major Gary Bowling stated the following about Misty Croslin-Cummings, these are likely only a small portion of what he referenced:

The confusion about the school and monday morning is clearly shown by the article that you referenced. Nothing objective could ever be gleaned by that convoluted maze, IMO.

http://www.artharris.com/2009/06/11/...ils/#more-2186

Simply attempting to read it made me dizzy.

You ask how a 5 year old "attempts" to pop a wheely, and that is some sort of incredible thing? A 3 year old might "attempt" to sing, a 2 year old might "attempt" to climb on a cat. What's the problem?

Your "three different versions" of what a child wears to bed you claim to be contradictory:
1. She was wearing her pink Hannah Montana shirt and her underwear.
2. She was in her pajamas.
3. PINK T-SHIRT, AND TAN SHORTS

Okay, now where is the problem? Her "pajamas" according to the messenger was a pink shirt and underwear. And #3 above seems to indicate that her "panties" were "tan" colored.
Where is the confusion, I dare inquire?

You post as some indication of contradiction or lie:

The first time you woke up what time was it?

Three, all I seen was 3, that’s all.

There is a night stand next to the bed and it’s facing towards the back of the room and it’s red, it says it in red and all I remember seeing is 3, that’s all I remember seeing is 3. "

2/10-PCSO Report:

Misty told me she woke up just before 3:00 am to get a drink and she noticed that Haleigh was missing.

All that I see is that the idea of "3" is recalled, not a story. If she was trying to manufacture a "story" she would have a heck of a lot more to say about the "3" deal, IMO.

I won't carry this ridiculousness further. You are trying to manufacture some objectivity and proof of deception from situations and statements that have nothing but subjective hopes and claims that prove absolutely nothing.

IMO

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Misty is the last person to see Haleigh. She has changed her story. She has been inconsistent. The police say they have physical evidence that contradicts her story. They called her story sketchy and a farce. She has failed several LDTs. Her family has indicated they think she's holding something back. In other words, she's a liar.

I hope someone can explain to me why it should be considered a voice of reason to think that she must be completely innocent and does not know anything.

If she's innocent and an unknown perp took Haleigh, why is she lying?

Your question is a really important and interesting one.

I don't think she "must be" "completely" innocent. I think it is possible (as Marc Klaas said last night) that she did put the kids to bed that night, go to bed herself, and slept through an abduction. It is possible. The issue with that story is why she would fail a polygraph and her story would contradict physical evidence if she is telling the truth as she knows it. I have no answer to that.

It is more likely that there are major elements of truth in the story (put the kids to bed and later found Haleigh missing, for example) with significant details left out and others fabricated. She could be lying to protect herself from the consequences of involuntary manslaughter charges if she left the kids alone and Haleigh was abducted. She is young enough to lie simply because she doesn't want to admit the bad thing(s) she did, whatever they are. In her mind, if she told the truth about the time she discovered Haleigh missing or maybe the circumstance (the door was unlocked from the inside) the police could still find Haleigh anyway. Once a lie starts, how does she go back? How does she suddenly say, "Gee, in the critical first hours after the disappearance, I lied and you eliminated situations and suspects based on stuff I made up."

That's a possible scenario. Another one, for me, is that Haleigh was abducted or assaulted much earlier while she was partying with her brother and his friends and that late hour given for the discovery that Haleigh is missing serves to through off suspicion from the person or persons she knows is responsible. And to make her look less resonsible for what happened.

it may also be that Misty suspects that someone who molested her also abducted and molested Haleigh and she is afraid to name that person. (Just a scenario, a hypothesis--no evidence of this. But I wonder if Misty's own past holds a clue to what happened to Haleigh.) In all of those cases, Misty could be lying or withholding information to cover up her own bad behavior or to avoid being held responsible for giving someone she knows is a very bad person access to Haleigh.

I think she can be innocent of intentionally harming Haleigh and "guilty" of lying, covering up, exposing both kids to harm, etc. If she knows Haleigh is dead (and I think that is a real possibility) she might have figured that she can't save Haleigh no matter what she tells LE so she might as well save herself. Lots of "ifs' and "possibilities" but all of it adds up to what most lies add up to: some truth mixed in with omissions, fabrications, and misleading statements, all intended to protect the liar from a painful truth and its consequences.

 

[Normcar21]

Normcar, you make a lot of good points, to which I would add that she has had apparently very little moral training while suffering considerable abuse of various kinds and thus has learned (wrongly, of course) that lying to protect herself is a useful tool. (For example, children often learn to lie to protect their abusive parents or deflect the suspicions of teachers and other authority figures. They fear losing the only home they have, even if it is an emotionally barren and abusive one).

The whole "undercover sting" debacle troubled me greatly because Misty already feels abandoned and betrayed by her mother and brother, her husband is divorcing her, and now her new "friend" turns out to be a big fake working 24/7 to betray her trust. I feel profoundly sorry for this young girl.

That said, she reminds me of some of the Charlie Manson girls who went along with Charlie's evil schemes and then ended up spending their lives in prison, long after they grew up enough to see how stupid and cruel and vicious they had been and really understand the consequences of what they had done. Now, that comparison is not meant to suggest that Misty murdered Haleigh, because I have no idea what she did, what she is hiding, or what she is lying about. I just want to point out that Misty's situation is ALSO a result of her OWN poor choices; all of her other circumstances don't excuse failing to tell the truth, the whole truth, about the day and night of Haleigh's disappearance. And of course Haleigh is too young to have had the luxury of choice.

I agree with you that she may be making some false statements in order to protect herself from some peripheral incident(s) that, as a relative minor, she makes a mountain of within herself (i.e.: having a few drinks or doing some crack that night). I would guess -- emphasize "guess" -- that whatever she is lieing about is incidental to the major crime but because of her youth she feels extremely guilty about "whatever" and it may have had a negative effect on her lie detector test; perhaps she is simply too young and "undeveloped" to comprehend that what she may or may not be lieing about is "not" going to implicate her in the crime itself, even though it may help to bring some lucidity to her actions.

As for any comparison to the Manson "family", well, I can't follow that as I have studied Manson and his "kids" extensively. No "daddy" or "god" figure exists in Misty's life, that I know of, who could coerce or mold or inspire this little girl. Yes, her past is similar to a few of the Manson girls, such as Sadie, but no male image could even begin to compare to a Manson like influence, imo.

 

[Concerned Papa]

The confusion about the school and monday morning is clearly shown by the article that you referenced. Nothing objective could ever be gleaned by that convoluted maze, IMO.

http://www.artharris.com/2009/06/11/...ils/#more-2186

Simply attempting to read it made me dizzy.

You ask how a 5 year old "attempts" to pop a wheely, and that is some sort of incredible thing? A 3 year old might "attempt" to sing, a 2 year old might "attempt" to climb on a cat. What's the problem?

Your "three different versions" of what a child wears to bed you claim to be contradictory:
1. She was wearing her pink Hannah Montana shirt and her underwear.
2. She was in her pajamas.
3. PINK T-SHIRT, AND TAN SHORTS

Okay, now where is the problem? Her "pajamas" according to the messenger was a pink shirt and underwear. And #3 above seems to indicate that her "panties" were "tan" colored.
Where is the confusion, I dare inquire?

You post as some indication of contradiction or lie:

The first time you woke up what time was it?

Three, all I seen was 3, that’s all.

There is a night stand next to the bed and it’s facing towards the back of the room and it’s red, it says it in red and all I remember seeing is 3, that’s all I remember seeing is 3. "

2/10-PCSO Report:

Misty told me she woke up just before 3:00 am to get a drink and she noticed that Haleigh was missing.

All that I see is that the idea of "3" is recalled, not a story. If she was trying to manufacture a "story" she would have a heck of a lot more to say about the "3" deal, IMO.

I won't carry this ridiculousness further. You are trying to manufacture some objectivity and proof of deception from situations and statements that have nothing but subjective hopes and claims that prove absolutely nothing.

IMO

The confusion about the school and monday morning is clearly shown by the article that you referenced. Nothing objective could ever be gleaned by that convoluted maze, IMO.

http://www.artharris.com/2009/06/11/...ils/#more-2186

Simply attempting to read it made me dizzy.

IMO, there is no confusion or contradictory information from the article, only from Misty Croslin’s stated unlikely trip to Browning Pearce Elementary School that Monday morning since none of the witnesses reported her or Junior being in the speeding vehicle.

Please accept my apologies for linking an article from a 2 time Emmy award winning journalist whose reading made you dizzy in your search for objectivity.

You ask how a 5 year old "attempts" to pop a wheely, and that is some sort of incredible thing? A 3 year old might "attempt" to sing, a 2 year old might "attempt" to climb on a cat. What's the problem?

I went to YouTube and searched "bicycle wheelies", hoping to actually see a five year old child "popping" or attempting to "pop" a wheelie, with or without training wheels. Although 25,700 videos are listed, none show the feat accomplished or attempted by a five year old, training wheels or no. IMO, by definition, the statement by Misty Croslin is incredible.

BTW, I was equally unsuccessful in being able to watch a 2 year old "climb on a cat". However you might be happy to know there are thousands of 3 year olds "attempting to sing."

Your "three different versions" of what a child wears to bed you claim to be contradictory:
1. She was wearing her pink Hannah Montana shirt and her underwear.
2. She was in her pajamas.
3. PINK T-SHIRT, AND TAN SHORTS

Okay, now where is the problem? Her "pajamas" according to the messenger was a pink shirt and underwear. And #3 above seems to indicate that her "panties" were "tan" colored.
Where is the confusion, I dare inquire?

1. A pink Hannah Montana shirt and underwear, although possible sleeping attire for a child, are not pajamas. From www.dictionary.com:

pa•ja•ma (pə-jä'mə, -jām'&#601
n.
A loose-fitting garment consisting of trousers and a shirt or top, worn for sleeping or lounging.

2. How does the description of PINK T-SHIRT, AND TAN SHORTS from the Officer's report, in any interpretation of the English language, seem to indicate that her "panties" were "tan" colored? Are you of the opinion that a member of LE did not know the difference between shorts and panties?

3. The contradiction of Misty Croslin's statements was never more evident than when the pink Hannah Montana t-shirt that 2 of these 3 versions included was found in the dirty clothes.

Since you dared to inquire, does that explain the confusion?

You post as some indication of contradiction or lie:

The first time you woke up what time was it?

Three, all I seen was 3, that’s all.

There is a night stand next to the bed and it’s facing towards the back of the room and it’s red, it says it in red and all I remember seeing is 3, that’s all I remember seeing is 3. "

2/10-PCSO Report:

Misty told me she woke up just before 3:00 am to get a drink and she noticed that Haleigh was missing.

All that I see is that the idea of "3" is recalled, not a story. If she was trying to manufacture a "story" she would have a heck of a lot more to say about the "3" deal, IMO.

In the PCSO report, Misty Croslin’s statement of “just before 3:00 am” is a reasonably finite indication of the time she awoke. In the hypnosis evaluation which you referenced, “seeing a 3” could be applied a large window of time.

Since you stated “Her version of events were clear, distinct, and not contradictory”, what time do you believe she woke up, I dare inquire?

I won't carry this ridiculousness further. You are trying to manufacture some objectivity and proof of deception from situations and statements that have nothing but subjective hopes and claims that prove absolutely nothing.

Nor will I. You are trying to manufacture a scenario of innocence where contradictions abound.

“We factually know that she is consistently inconsistent”

 

[Pondering Mind]

Hi there, I think I have posted it all in the theories thread. I believe HaLeigh is alive, and hidden with family and friends.

edited to add: theories topic: Theories discussion: What could have happened to Haleigh? #3 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

Hi Flossie...I still can't find your theory in the tons of 'theory threads' and . was just wondering if you had a chance to look? OR..if you wouldn't mind giving a brief synopsis of what has brought you to this conclusion. (prolly be a whole lot easier than drudging back thru those threads...it made my head hurt , lol. I am truly and sincerly curious. I guess I'm just trying say that I haven't seen ANYTHING to steer me in that direction and I want to know what it is that I'm missing! ...I do...I promise...If you would rather not answer I understand, but pondering minds have to ask, ya know?

I know this is off topic here, perhaps if you choose to answer we should take it to the 'theories thread'? Thanks either way

 

[kant]

My response to you: I agree, finally, a voice of reason and not simply a sheep "following the media goat"

Applause:woohoo:

Time for snoozing, what a great post, IMO, thanks, that will make my sleep less nasty. The voice of individual reason is always, to me, soothing. I find a tiny string of hope within a maze of media inculcation and propaganda

bbm


I dont believe I understand what you mean by the sheep. What does that mean?

tia.

.

 

[Normcar21]

Papa inquired...
Please accept my apologies for linking an article from a 2 time Emmy award winning journalist whose reading made you dizzy in your search for objectivity.

My comment - because this individual won some award makes him or her above reproach? I see, so as long as they have some sort of "title" then they are correct. Thanks for that, I'll remember to let that sort of thing keep me on the right track.

You, Papa, state about the wheely thing:

Although 25,700 videos are listed, none show the feat accomplished or attempted by a five year old, training wheels or no. IMO, by definition, the statement by Misty Croslin is incredible.

My response - Misty claimed that the kid was "trying" or "attempting." Perhaps your google search wasn't successful because no 5 year old had yet accomplished this dynamic feat of greatness. IMO, I am somewhat puzzled why you can justify using kiddie wheelies as some sort of proof that Misty is a nasty little liar. It is the "wheely puzzle" to me.

Papa says: 2. How does the description of PINK T-SHIRT, AND TAN SHORTS from the Officer's report, in any interpretation of the English language, seem to indicate that her "panties" were "tan" colored? Are you of the opinion that a member of LE did not know the difference between shorts and panties?

My answer - yes, Misty herself claimed that H liked to sleep in her shorts, or panties, she didn't like jammies. The idea that you are referencing descriptions from various individuals about shorts, panties, jammies, or other is to me about as ridiculous as it gets. I apologize if this insults you, but I am only saying what I believe, reducing evidence to the description of bed clothing is ridiculous to me.

You ask, "what time did she wake up"? Hmm, my guess is around "3" a.m. because that is what she indicates. Whether or not she dreamed the number or not, that is what she offered, and nothing else, so she has, to date, not contradicted that "3"

I appreciate consideration of solid evidence, it is my opinion that your offerings are extremely subjective and can be bounced around like a volleyball on Friday night. I apologize if this offends you. Your suggestions do not offend me, I simply don't believe that they hold any credibility. This has nothing to do with personalities or character. I apologize if my viewpoints are not in line with your views and opinions.