Ron C. # 11

[Skully]

Some one also pointed out (sorry don't know who) that Misty may have had to change where Haleigh was sleeping because, if you look at the video of where the big bed is, if Misty was on the side by the door, the kidnapper has to reach over her and JR to get Haleigh. The bed is up against a wall. So you either climb into the bed and get her from the bottom or reach over the two. Misty said she got up to get a drink of water, so she is on the side where the door is. So to make this work, Haleigh has to be in the bed on the floor.

 

[Helplessly Hoping]

Some one also pointed out (sorry don't know who) that Misty may have had to change where Haleigh was sleeping because, if you look at the video of where the big bed is, if Misty was on the side by the door, the kidnapper has to reach over her and JR to get Haleigh. The bed is up against a wall. So you either climb into the bed and get her from the bottom or reach over the two. Misty said she got up to get a drink of water, so she is on the side where the door is. So to make this work, Haleigh has to be in the bed on the floor.

yes I do think Misty had to change her story too.

 

[Dee10]

Since nobody suggested where this line appropriately goes & it semi does have to do with Ron lock bumping & locked doors, I will post it here. I replayed and type quotes of TJ's interview of last Tues.

In replaying the interview at about 3 min. in:
TJ corrected NG the other night with what she didn’t know “They had to reprocess the door once again as they thought they missed something and now without a doubt there was absolutely no force entry into that back door and if indeed that is where is where the culprit came in.”

Further about 34 min. in more discussion about the door & TJ states “the door has been returned since & is fully functional for the new tenant there”. He stated his personal opinion “that they were looking for a lock-pick situation as it is a deadbolt.”

Since there was never a question about the screen door being locked only the inside door and the screen door doesn’t have a deadbolt…I concluded based on this it was the inside back door, although I believe they should have taken both if they didn't lol. Unfortunately at the time the door was taken; the press was focused on the “side-show” of the wedding instead of possible evidence and focusing on Haleigh.

So I am going to stand behind TJ as of now; who is a program director, he is one of a few investigative reporters that have followed the story , who in that same interview states he gets 4 sources than the usual 3, although I understand reporters make mistakes. Also have you noticed sometimes there will be numerous articles of the exact same thing...just reprinted without investigating. Uggh, it is hard to sleuth the facts if they are wrong as we all know.

 

[Skully]

It may have been reported as the Screen door being taken, IDK. I just remember what was said. I know I didn't read it, I heard it. So I stand corrected. But you are right, they should have taken both!

 

[robbie11]

Shout out to Ronald... Please help us find Haleigh...talk to LE and have Misty talk to LE. Little Haleigh needs to be found. :blowkiss: you are in my prayers Haleigh.

 

[Malesherbes]

Since nobody suggested where this line appropriately goes & it semi does have to do with Ron lock bumping & locked doors, I will post it here. I replayed and type quotes of TJ's interview of last Tues.

In replaying the interview at about 3 min. in:
TJ corrected NG the other night with what she didn’t know “They had to reprocess the door once again as they thought they missed something and now without a doubt there was absolutely no force entry into that back door and if indeed that is where is where the culprit came in.”

Further about 34 min. in more discussion about the door & TJ states “the door has been returned since & is fully functional for the new tenant there”. He stated his personal opinion “that they were looking for a lock-pick situation as it is a deadbolt.”

Since there was never a question about the screen door being locked only the inside door and the screen door doesn’t have a deadbolt…I concluded based on this it was the inside back door, although I believe they should have taken both if they didn't lol. Unfortunately at the time the door was taken; the press was focused on the “side-show” of the wedding instead of possible evidence.

So I am going to stand behind TJ as of now; who is a program director, he is one of a few investigative reporters that have followed the story , who in that same interview states he gets 4 sources than the usual 3, although I understand reporters make mistakes. Also have you noticed sometimes there will be numerous articles of the exact same thing...just reprinted without investigating. Uggh, it is hard to sleuth the facts if they are wrong as we all know. That's all I can say on this topic.

Ya know, they could have taken the door, very early on and replaced it with another door and collected prints off the new one- I mean they had to get Mistys fingerprints one way or another- if they got new prints off a new door that limits the people in the mobile home after the alleged abductions, and I bet they didn't have Mistys prints to begin, but they got them somehow without asking her, I have never heard of her getting printed before, she is a juvenile-

 

[Helplessly Hoping]

Shout out to Ronald... Please help us find Haleigh...talk to LE and have Misty talk to LE. Little Haleigh needs to be found. :blowkiss: you are in my prayers Haleigh.

raying:

 

[texasmommy39]

Well what I posted earlier PCSO states from their press release "At this point, the evidence and investigatory effort has minimized the likelihood that Haleigh’s disappearance is the work of a stranger." Your (no direct) quote from a reporter's LE interpretation of says it is possible.

Definition Time:

Minimized - To reduce to the smallest possible amount, extent, size, or degree.
Possible - Capable of happening, existing, or being true without contradicting proven facts, laws, or circumstances.

You asked what does that mean; you can draw your own conclusion. :waitasec:

IMO it means Family. The possibility that it was someone farther out than everyday contact or close relation has been minimized as a posibility.

 

[DotsEyes]

Media reports it was the screen door taken -

It could be very possible that the toddler bed on the floor for the walk thru was JRs mattress from his bedroom so people could get a visual of where the mattress was on the floor.

snipped by me

IIRC on a walk thru with Granny I heard someone say "this is Jr's bed" and I assumed that they meant his mattress and that since HaLeigh's had been taken, they put it there for visual effect. They were trying to recreate the room for the cameras and Jr's room was not on the tour anyway. No need for it to be.

I can't imagine that a child goes missing in the middle of the night and LE doesn't eventually take the child's mattress and linens for testing.

The screen door was taken and apparently the landlord took a while to replace it, if ever. LE could have done all the field tests it needed on the solid exterior door and simply taken the locks in for analysis. If they did take the locks, they would replace the locks with new ones or get the landlord to do it. They don't just leave you without locks.

The fact that the lock was not picked is of no moment since we do not know the point of entry.

When LE took the panels to the water heater and the bathtub out, they were looking to see if anything was hidden there, like a possible weapon used in the crime, bloody clothes, etc. They weren't looking for anything in particular they were just looking. That is what they do.

 

[lil momma]

snipped by me

IIRC on a walk thru with Granny I heard someone say "this is Jr's bed" and I assumed that they meant his mattress and that since HaLeigh's had been taken, they put it there for visual effect. They were trying to recreate the room for the cameras and Jr's room was not on the tour anyway. No need for it to be.

I can't imagine that a child goes missing in the middle of the night and LE doesn't eventually take the child's mattress and linens for testing.

The screen door was taken and apparently the landlord took a while to replace it, if ever. LE could have done all the field tests it needed on the solid exterior door and simply taken the locks in for analysis. If they did take the locks, they would replace the locks with new ones or get the landlord to do it. They don't just leave you without locks.

The fact that the lock was not picked is of no moment since we do not know the point of entry.

When LE took the panels to the water heater and the bathtub out, they were looking to see if anything was hidden there, like a possible weapon used in the crime, bloody clothes, etc. They weren't looking for anything in particular they were just looking. That is what they do.

BBM

ITA DotsEyes: I am thinking, though, deadbolt locks are usually in two pieces, one for the front side of the door and one piece that will connect to the other for the back side of the door. I am thinking that if they had removed the locks from the door it may have botched (maybe not the right word) the evidence. Meaning the interior of the lock, where they would find evidence of picking or even bumping the lock. But this is just my opinion.

 

[Dee10]

GRACE: Why did police take your back door off the hinges and take it away, Ronald?

CUMMINGS: I`m not sure. They took it for some further investigation. I think the locks and everything. They want to check some things that those -- you would have to ask them, the investigators on that one, Miss Nancy. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0903/16/ng.01.html

 

[elle1919]

Dee in reading the transcript you referred to above I came across a statement that really bothered me back at the beginning of this case.

Snipped-UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hi, Nancy. Something has been bothering me. If the story`s true that Misty was out partying and left the kids home alone, it`s possible Misty put the cement block by the back door so she could slip quietly back inside the house and not wake up the kids, but someone else could have gotten inside the house and took Haleigh before Misty got home.

GRACE: To Ronald Cummings, Haleigh`s father, who is with us tonight taking your calls live. Ronald, has the theory that Misty left the home some time during the night been disproved?

RONALD CUMMINGS: I`m not sure. I believe that it has, Nancy. I`m almost 100 percent sure, but I wouldn`t say that and lie to you. I`m pretty sure it has been disproved.

GRACE: Do you believe she left the home and left the children alone, Ronald?

RONALD CUMMINGS: Absolutely not.

My bold on RC's statement. He says that he is not sure that the story was disproved. Personally, that bothers me, because his beautiful treasured child is missing.....how can he answer that he is not CERTAIN of this and still marry Misty. At what point don't you do everything in your power to make ABSOLUTELY certain that the story is disproved? I understand he wasn't there, I understand he might never know that fact for sure. Fine. But why do you marry the person that you are not sure of?

I want so badly to believe that this father is not involved whatsoever in the disappearance of his child. But the fact that he married Misty right when this was all happening, I just cannot rationalize. Further on in this interview with NG RC states that he did not go to NY on a honeymoon, he says it was to do an interview to keep focus on his daughter. The way he says....."it was NOT a honeymoon" was a little weird to me. Like here....snip...

GRACE: Now, you want to clear up -- a lot of people are attacking you for going to New York for a honeymoon. Please, here`s your chance.

RONALD CUMMINGS: Absolutely. I went there for an exclusive with the "Today" show. I did not go there on a honeymoon at all. It was not a honeymoon at all. I went there for an exclusive with the "Today" show. - snip.

Link: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0903/16/ng.01.html

In light of the recent events with RC and Hank jr...I was thinking. Hank jr says that Misty called and said she didn't want to be over at RC's anymore. That is why HC went over to get her. Back when the two of them got married people speculated that RC married Misty just to keep her close. I think at one point Cobra made a comment that RC told him that himself. Well, does everyone remember when Haleigh was abducted and Misty was away from RC for a few days? She went back to her brothers house or wherever, maybe RC was afraid Misty wasn't going to come back, then he would never find out what happened to Haleigh. Hence the marriage?

 

[Shelby77]

Dee in reading the transcript you referred to above I came across a statement that really bothered me back at the beginning of this case.

Snipped-UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hi, Nancy. Something has been bothering me. If the story`s true that Misty was out partying and left the kids home alone, it`s possible Misty put the cement block by the back door so she could slip quietly back inside the house and not wake up the kids, but someone else could have gotten inside the house and took Haleigh before Misty got home.

GRACE: To Ronald Cummings, Haleigh`s father, who is with us tonight taking your calls live. Ronald, has the theory that Misty left the home some time during the night been disproved?

RONALD CUMMINGS: I`m not sure. I believe that it has, Nancy. I`m almost 100 percent sure, but I wouldn`t say that and lie to you. I`m pretty sure it has been disproved.

GRACE: Do you believe she left the home and left the children alone, Ronald?

RONALD CUMMINGS: Absolutely not.

My bold on RC's statement. He says that he is not sure that the story was disproved. Personally, that bothers me, because his beautiful treasured child is missing.....how can he answer that he is not CERTAIN of this and still marry Misty. At what point don't you do everything in your power to make ABSOLUTELY certain that the story is disproved? I understand he wasn't there, I understand he might never know that fact for sure. Fine. But why do you marry the person that you are not sure of?

I want so badly to believe that this father is not involved whatsoever in the disappearance of his child. But the fact that he married Misty right when this was all happening, I just cannot rationalize. Further on in this interview with NG RC states that he did not go to NY on a honeymoon, he says it was to do an interview to keep focus on his daughter. The way he says....."it was NOT a honeymoon" was a little weird to me. Like here....snip...

GRACE: Now, you want to clear up -- a lot of people are attacking you for going to New York for a honeymoon. Please, here`s your chance.

RONALD CUMMINGS: Absolutely. I went there for an exclusive with the "Today" show. I did not go there on a honeymoon at all. It was not a honeymoon at all. I went there for an exclusive with the "Today" show. - snip.

Link: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0903/16/ng.01.html

In light of the recent events with RC and Hank jr...I was thinking. Hank jr says that Misty called and said she didn't want to be over at RC's anymore. That is why HC went over to get her. Back when the two of them got married people speculated that RC married Misty just to keep her close. I think at one point Cobra made a comment that RC told him that himself. Well, does everyone remember when Haleigh was abducted and Misty was away from RC for a few days? She went back to her brothers house or wherever, maybe RC was afraid Misty wasn't going to come back, then he would never find out what happened to Haleigh. Hence the marriage?

BBM
I remember that! Actually, I remember it as she went to stay with her parents (same difference, IMO lol).

Great point, thanks for bringing it up Elle, I had forgotten all about that.
I'm really starting to lean towards that being the purpose of the marriage, and that fits right in for me... Hmmm, gives me something else to chew on for a bit lol

 

[Emeralgem]

Well, does everyone remember when Haleigh was abducted and Misty was away from RC for a few days? She went back to her brothers house or wherever, maybe RC was afraid Misty wasn't going to come back, then he would never find out what happened to Haleigh. Hence the marriage?

[/B]


BBM
I remember that! Actually, I remember it as she went to stay with her parents (same difference, IMO lol).

Great point, thanks for bringing it up Elle, I had forgotten all about that.
I'm really starting to lean towards that being the purpose of the marriage, and that fits right in for me... Hmmm, gives me something else to chew on for a bit lol

IMHO.. I'm NOT buying that he married her because he was afraid she would leave and he would never know what happened to Haleigh..
IMHO. That scenario is just an attempt to throw the dogs to another trail..JMO

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Dee in reading the transcript you referred to above I came across a statement that really bothered me back at the beginning of this case.

Snipped-UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hi, Nancy. Something has been bothering me. If the story`s true that Misty was out partying and left the kids home alone, it`s possible Misty put the cement block by the back door so she could slip quietly back inside the house and not wake up the kids, but someone else could have gotten inside the house and took Haleigh before Misty got home.

GRACE: To Ronald Cummings, Haleigh`s father, who is with us tonight taking your calls live. Ronald, has the theory that Misty left the home some time during the night been disproved?

RONALD CUMMINGS: I`m not sure. I believe that it has, Nancy. I`m almost 100 percent sure, but I wouldn`t say that and lie to you. I`m pretty sure it has been disproved.

GRACE: Do you believe she left the home and left the children alone, Ronald?

RONALD CUMMINGS: Absolutely not.

My bold on RC's statement. He says that he is not sure that the story was disproved. Personally, that bothers me, because his beautiful treasured child is missing.....how can he answer that he is not CERTAIN of this and still marry Misty. At what point don't you do everything in your power to make ABSOLUTELY certain that the story is disproved? I understand he wasn't there, I understand he might never know that fact for sure. Fine. But why do you marry the person that you are not sure of?

I want so badly to believe that this father is not involved whatsoever in the disappearance of his child. But the fact that he married Misty right when this was all happening, I just cannot rationalize. Further on in this interview with NG RC states that he did not go to NY on a honeymoon, he says it was to do an interview to keep focus on his daughter. The way he says....."it was NOT a honeymoon" was a little weird to me. Like here....snip...

GRACE: Now, you want to clear up -- a lot of people are attacking you for going to New York for a honeymoon. Please, here`s your chance.

RONALD CUMMINGS: Absolutely. I went there for an exclusive with the "Today" show. I did not go there on a honeymoon at all. It was not a honeymoon at all. I went there for an exclusive with the "Today" show. - snip.

Link: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0903/16/ng.01.html

In light of the recent events with RC and Hank jr...I was thinking. Hank jr says that Misty called and said she didn't want to be over at RC's anymore. That is why HC went over to get her. Back when the two of them got married people speculated that RC married Misty just to keep her close. I think at one point Cobra made a comment that RC told him that himself. Well, does everyone remember when Haleigh was abducted and Misty was away from RC for a few days? She went back to her brothers house or wherever, maybe RC was afraid Misty wasn't going to come back, then he would never find out what happened to Haleigh. Hence the marriage?

He isn't saying HE is unsure of Misty being home. He is stating that LE may believe she wasn't home and has not cleared that possibility in their own minds, imo. He said he absolutely does not believe she left the house.

GRACE: Do you believe she left the home and left the children alone, Ronald?

RONALD CUMMINGS: Absolutely not.

IMO, it wasn't a honeymoon other than the timing. He did just go for the interview to keep the focus on Haleigh, imo. You don't take your mom on the red eye to NYC if you are planning on it being a romantic thing, imo. They probably didn't get much sleep after the wedding and rushing off to NYC...so not much time for "honeymoon" activities either.

 

[Shaymus at The Rock]

snipped by me

IIRC on a walk thru with Granny I heard someone say "this is Jr's bed" and I assumed that they meant his mattress and that since HaLeigh's had been taken, they put it there for visual effect. They were trying to recreate the room for the cameras and Jr's room was not on the tour anyway. No need for it to be.

I can't imagine that a child goes missing in the middle of the night and LE doesn't eventually take the child's mattress and linens for testing.

The screen door was taken and apparently the landlord took a while to replace it, if ever. LE could have done all the field tests it needed on the solid exterior door and simply taken the locks in for analysis. If they did take the locks, they would replace the locks with new ones or get the landlord to do it. They don't just leave you without locks.

The fact that the lock was not picked is of no moment since we do not know the point of entry.

When LE took the panels to the water heater and the bathtub out, they were looking to see if anything was hidden there, like a possible weapon used in the crime, bloody clothes, etc. They weren't looking for anything in particular they were just looking. That is what they do.

BBM

I don't remember AS commenting that the mattress was actually off of Jr's bed, but, I may have missed an interview. If so, could you please post the link ?


March 6, 2009

AS, pointing to the toddler mattress on the floor of the Master Bedroom, "This is where she slept." The mattress appears to have a sheet on it, although there is no case on the pillow.


http://www.firstcoastnews.com/video...stId=playlist&maven_referralObject=1054323919 1:23 minutes (counting down)

 

[stilettos]

Well, does everyone remember when Haleigh was abducted and Misty was away from RC for a few days? She went back to her brothers house or wherever, maybe RC was afraid Misty wasn't going to come back, then he would never find out what happened to Haleigh. Hence the marriage?




IMHO.. I'm NOT buying that he married her because he was afraid she would leave and he would never know what happened to Haleigh..
IMHO. That scenario is just an attempt to throw the dogs to another trail..

I am tired of rabbit trails.....I think we need to go back to basics and keep it simple. Looking at the custodial parent and teen babysitter/new wife. The whole 48 hours before and then the day of the "claimed" abduction. we really have no way yet to know when this crime was committed or what crime it is...I will say I truly believe that HaLeigh is dead....and that the crime was COMMITTED MUCH EARLIER THAN THE 911 CALL. I tire of chasing rabbit trails.

 

[elle1919]

Well, does everyone remember when Haleigh was abducted and Misty was away from RC for a few days? She went back to her brothers house or wherever, maybe RC was afraid Misty wasn't going to come back, then he would never find out what happened to Haleigh. Hence the marriage?




IMHO.. I'm NOT buying that he married her because he was afraid she would leave and he would never know what happened to Haleigh..
IMHO. That scenario is just an attempt to throw the dogs to another trail..

What dogs? Forgive me but if you are trying to make a point I prefer if you just come right out and say what it is. I am not trying to throw the dogs down any trail. I am trying to make heads or tails of this situation. I personally do not feel that RC married MC for love. It was that opinion that I was trying to explain. When I watched the NG interview where RC was telling NG that HE DID NOT GO TO NY FOR A HONEYMOON....it sounded to me as if he had forgotten that he had married the person in the home with his daughter when she went missing. You are certainly entitled to your opinion however just because someone has an opinion different from your own it doesn't mean it is any less plausible.

 

[elle1919]

Many scenario's, many opinions, ONE FACT....Haleigh is still gone and I want to know when she is coming home. Dead or alive, this child deserves better circumstances than the ones that she has been given.

 

[Emeralgem]

What dogs? Forgive me but if you are trying to make a point I prefer if you just come right out and say what it is. I am not trying to throw the dogs down any trail. I am trying to make heads or tails of this situation. I personally do not feel that RC married MC for love. It was that opinion that I was trying to explain. When I watched the NG interview where RC was telling NG that HE DID NOT GO TO NY FOR A HONEYMOON....it sounded to me as if he had forgotten that he had married the person in the home with his daughter when she went missing. You are certainly entitled to your opinion however just because someone has an opinion different from your own it doesn't mean it is any less plausible.

BBM.. Agreed, however I really wasn't referring to what you stated as much as i was the person who agreed with you that Ron C married Misty so he could find out what happened to Haleigh..

Personally, I'm not buying that scenario..IMHO Ron C and Misty BOTH know what happened to Haleigh..And that is the reason for the marriage... JMO..

And I made reference to the dogs thrown on another trail due to the fact I believe the dogs were given incorrect information the night Haleigh disappeared and were put on the wrong trail then considering LE was told that night that Haleigh had been abducted out of Ron C's bed.


Looks like NOW though he is getting ready to throw Misty under the bus..
After six months and him stating at first that Haleigh was stolen out of his bed, then changing his story to she was sleeping on the toddler mattress and he knew exactly where thosse beds were positioned eventhough he was at work when she was allegedly abducted.. He is NOW saying Misty never even went to bed that night. The bed was made when he got home.... never slept in...Imagine that...