Ron Cummings Arrested 2009.08.06 RE: Battery involving brother-in-law #2

[Shaymus at The Rock]

The Cummings didn't want unwelcome and uninvited people showing up in the middle of the night. Who would??? A child lives in that house....the Croslins ought to know better than to show up in the middle of the night like that.

As for your suggestion the Cummings have multiple recorded claims filed by one family member against another, do you have a link? I've not seen any evidence of Ron or his mother having any claim let alone "multiple" claims against each other.

Again, do not twist the post. The issue is that the Cummings apparently did not want LE at their residence that night.

Regarding the charges, review the documents thread. Charges filed against AS and TN are there.

 

[impatientredhead]

I added them as "possibilities". I find it hard to believe that sober middle aged people would trespass on a property where a child and grandmother resided in the middle of the night, uninvited. I don't know any sober person who'd pull a stunt like that. That's why I think it's a possibility.

So this drunk attention seeking family has had 6 months of press coverage and just decided to pull this stunt? The same family that hasn't made any allegations against Ron in the press, hasn't slung mud his way during this time, and signed of on their daughter marrying him?

or

Middle aged parents with an adult child who may or may not be in distress, emotional or physical, go where their child is regardless of invite or time of day?

They are both possibilities, I will give you that. Hell, it is possible the whole lot of them are in on it and staged the whole thing to get press coverage, keep Haleigh's name in the press, pad the book a little bit. There are lots of possibilities, some of them make more sense than others.

Taking Hank with them was their error in judgement.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Again, do not twist the post. The issue is that the Cummings apparently did not want LE at their residence that night.

Regarding the charges, review the documents thread. Charges filed against AS and TN are there.

I am not twisting anything, but think you might be. Where does it say the Cummings didn't want LE at their residence that night? The only thing we know for a fact as I understand it, was that he didn't want the Croslins coming on to his property in the middle of the night uninvited. LE wasn't involved until after the trespass occurred.

 

[Shaymus at The Rock]

I added them as "possibilities". I find it hard to believe that sober middle aged people would trespass on a property where a child and grandmother resided in the middle of the night, uninvited. I don't know any sober person who'd pull a stunt like that. That's why I think it's a possibility.

Kinda think that LE would've noted that when they responsed to the Croslin's 911 call. Now, it took awhile for LE to get over to the Sykes' mh. So maybe anyone in that residence who could have been under the influence of a legal and/or illegal substance had had time to sober up. But the Croslins, nah, they were interviewed right away.

 

[fortytwo]

, Kiki....you are right! The facts really do keep slipping away.

Ron shoved HC2...RC was the one who initiated contact!!!

Thank you for pointing that out..

There seems to be some continuing confusion about what constitutes "assault" in the state of Florida.

I've pointed this out before, but just as a gentle reminder ...

Title XLVI
CRIMES Chapter 784
ASSAULT; BATTERY; CULPABLE NEGLIGENCE View Entire Chapter

[SIZE=-1]784.011 Assault.-- [/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1](1) An "assault" is an intentional, unlawful threat by word or act to do violence to the person of another, coupled with an apparent ability to do so, and doing some act which creates a well-founded fear in such other person that such violence is imminent.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]
(my bold above)

So, you see, if it can be established that either of the Hanks committed even "[/SIZE]an intentional, unlawful threat by word" then they are the ones guilty of "assault".

The assault thus committed by them was responded to by Ron. That would be self defense.

This interpretation is as reasonable as others, and, unlike them, founded in Florida statute.

The final determination of the facts of the episode will be made in a court of law. That's if it is determined that enough evidence exists to even bring it to trial, which seems doubtful.

We have only the statements from the participants. Unless one makes a conscious choice to completely disregard statements inconvenient to their prejudices and relies only on those which are supportive of them it is quite impossible to assign fault solely to one party.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

So this drunk attention seeking family has had 6 months of press coverage and just decided to pull this stunt? The same family that hasn't made any allegations against Ron in the press, hasn't slung mud his way during this time, and signed of on their daughter marrying him?

or

Middle aged parents with an adult child who may or may not be in distress, emotional or physical, go where their child is regardless of invite or time of day?

They are both possibilities, I will give you that. Hell, it is possible the whole lot of them are in on it and staged the whole thing to get press coverage, keep Haleigh's name in the press, pad the book a little bit. There are lots of possibilities, some of them make more sense than others.

Taking Hank with them was their error in judgement.

You must have forgotten about Hank's ridiculous allegations about Ron supplying him drugs?? They were made very publicly, both to LE and to the media.

Hmmm.....guess we all have different parents. I argued with my husband frequently, but thankfully my parents never showed up at his mother's home in the middle of the night wanting to take on my husband and try to physically remove me from my own home. But, my parents weren't drinkers. If they ever thought I was really in danger, I'm sure they would have called the police rather than risk further inflaming the situation by showing up as a mob and trying to fight my husband and remove me from the home. Heck, my parents would have been in their pj's that time of night, not galavanting around waking up grandparents and children.

 

[raeann]

Kinda think that LE would've noted that when they responsed to the Croslin's 911 call. Now, it took awhile for LE to get over to the Sykes' mh. So maybe anyone in that residence who could have been under the influence of a legal and/or illegal substance had had time to sober up. But the Croslins, nah, they were interviewed right away.

ITA, according to the time notations, it had been nearly 2 1/2 hours between the initial altercation, and the booking time for RC at the station.

 

[Indiana at Heart]

I added them as "possibilities". I find it hard to believe that sober middle aged people would trespass on a property where a child and grandmother resided in the middle of the night, uninvited. I don't know any sober person who'd pull a stunt like that. That's why I think it's a possibility.

If they been drinking they would of been picked up on DUI/DWI if driving a car or PI outside of RC. JMO they was not drinking JMO

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

Kinda think that LE would've noted that when they responsed to the Croslin's 911 call. Now, it took awhile for LE to get over to the Sykes' mh. So maybe anyone in that residence who could have been under the influence of a legal and/or illegal substance had had time to sober up. But the Croslins, nah, they were interviewed right away.

Of course they were....they were the complainants. Can't file a complaint without making a statement.

I wonder if this neck brace business is someone trying to cash in.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

ITA, according to the time notations, it had been nearly 2 1/2 hours between the initial altercation, and the booking time for RC at the station.

Not much time at all then....he would have been picked up and taken down there some time before the "booking" took place. I've seen people wait in Police Stations for hours waiting for the booking process to occur.

 

[bunnyphoenix1]

There seems to be some continuing confusion about what constitutes "assault" in the state of Florida.

I've pointed this out before, but just as a gentle reminder ...

[SIZE=-1]
(my bold above)

So, you see, if it can be established that either of the Hanks committed even "[/SIZE]an intentional, unlawful threat by word" then they are the ones guilty of "assault".

The assault thus committed by them was responded to by Ron. That would be self defense.

This interpretation is as reasonable as others, and, unlike them, founded in Florida statute.

The final determination of the facts of the episode will be made in a court of law. That's if it is determined that enough evidence exists to even bring it to trial, which seems doubtful.

We have only the statements from the participants. Unless one makes a conscious choice to completely disregard statements inconvenient to their prejudices and relies only on those which are supportive of them it is quite impossible to assign fault solely to one party.

Thank you for posting that! The law is basically the same where I live. It seems to me Croslin Jr is guilty of a felony before Ron even reacts. Trespass and assault on the person occupying the property. Where I come from that would be considered a very serious offence.

And, ITA re the self defence, and also think it unlikely that the SA will proceed with the matter against Ron. But unless the Croslins can prove they were invited to the premises, they might have this whole thing seriously backfire on them when the SA looks at it.

 

[Tom'sGirl]

Many posts in this thread are Off Topic and have drifted into discussion about past events, not this current one. :sheesh: