Theories about Ron's breaks and werk schedule

[YellowSubmarine]

If the topic here is theories about Ron's break and work schedule, my theory is that LE knows when he was at work. And I think the 911 call supports that he has come home and found his daughter missing. Let's compare what Misty says and what Ron says, via statement analysis.



The pattern is clear.
Not one straightforward, syntactically clear statement. "We just like, you know." "It's almost like--on the stairs--we have a walkway...". There is really not one coherent sentence in this list. And we know from hearing the tape that she was far from hysterical or distraught. She's just not telling the truth about any of it.

Lots of alibi-making because she is inserting information that 911 doesn't need and is not germane to asking for police response. "We just like, you know, it was about 10 o'clock--she was sleeping, I was cleaning." "When I was asleep it wasn't that way." (How would she know?) There's someone telling a rehearsed story. She literally can't fit the story into the 911 operator's questions. She's telling the alibi.

The first statement is the most telling: “Hi…umm…I just woke up…and our backdoor was wide open and I think…and I can’t find our daughter." Now, the order of this is understandable, if not optimal. But what is missing is the connective tissue. She might be telling the story in the order it happened: wake up, find the backdoor open, can't find the child. But what is "I think" doing in there? She thinks she can't find "our daughter"? She thinks the open door is linked to the missing child? Here is one of those syntax breaks that indicates possible deception. What is she starting to say that she has to stop? The sentence that she can't finish? She can't say "I think" the child has been kidnapped or someone came in and stole the child because that is not part of her story. Her story is that she just woke up and presto, the door is open and Haleigh is missing. She has no idea where she is. But the break in the sentence indicates that there is something that she isn't saying.

Now, here is the early part of Ron's part of the 911 call.



The pattern: Clear sentences. No extraneous information. The part about "I just got home from work" is important information because it tells the 911 operator that he wasn't home and has just found her missing. It anticipates the question, "When did you find her missing?" in a straightforward way. And he asks for help: "I need someone here now." Clear, perfect syntax, no breaks or interruptions. Every single sentence letter perfect syntax, including "I don't **** know." Even his rant (which would be one place to look for deception) is rendered in perfect syntax, including complex sentence structure.
Contrast his response for a description of the pajamas with Misty's response to what Haleigh was wearing:

She moves straight from the answer to the "story." Ron? Just answers the question.

Now, it isn't hard to see that these two people's "statements" are radically different in terms of the things that statement analysts look at. That doesn't mean that RC's story is true. But seen in contrast to Misty's statements--which we know are lies--RC is clear, coherent, straightforward and highly emotional. And if the "RC killed her before he went to work or on his break" theories are true, he would have had hours to stew over a story, rehearse it and thus stumble into the same linguistic traps that Misty does. Because when people lie, their brains often have to scramble to get the words out.

My favorite statement analysis site, for those who might want to see other liars do their lying thing: http://www.statementanalysis.com/lying/

I agree and, respectfully, disagree. What you're saying about the statements and "alibi making" goes for both, IMO. Just because MC was the one to call (we know that RC made her call) and she embelished more than RC during the call, I don't think means much. His statement of "I just got home from work and..." is just as alibi making as hers. PLUS the fact he was constantly answering things with "I was at work". Most of the time, it didn't even make sense as an answer. "Do you believe Misty's story?", "Do you think Jr told Crystal the story about the man in black?", "What do you think happened?" -- and many, many more. That statement, added with the smirk, tells me he's just sitting back saying "ha ha suckers!"

 

[YellowSubmarine]

The same way that TN "knew" that Ronald and Misty always slept with the bedroom door open in the mobile home

How often did TN spend the night in the mh to know this? Did she ever spend the night with Ronald and his children in the mh? It would seem to me that, if another adult - especially my mother - spent the night in my home as I bedded my "girlfriend", the bedroom door would be closed. If grandma was there, what reason would there be for the children to sleep in the same bed/bedroom with my girlfriend and me? Wouldn't grandma want to be with her grandchildren and have them close to her while daddy and his girlfriend were together in the bedroom?

I don't know about anyone else, but the proclamation by TN that she knew that the bedroom door was always open baffles me no end :banghead: It seems that RC and his mother believe that they're smarter than the rest of the world and "know" things even when they're not there.

I AGREE! Just like TN knew that they ALWAYS slept with the TV on. Just like RC knew the dead bolt was locked ALL NIGHT because he supposedly checked it before he went to work at 3:30-4pm. Just like GGMS knew that MC did not leave the mh ALL NIGHT because she was there at 7-8pm

 

[kamky]

In your assertion, Ron came home from work and discovered his daughter missing. That's incorrect: Ron had left work and had gone to a convenience store and purchased 3 specific items (beer, peanuts, and cigarettes), and then came home. If his intention was to rattle off what he'd been doing when he discovered his child missing, he excluded the part about stopping at the store. He was not totally honest. In fact, it wasn't until quite some time later we discovered he'd stopped at all.

But, Ron didn't load up his comments to the 911 Operator with unnecessary details, unlike Misty. How can we say that Misty was suspicious because she did add lots of trivia to her comments and then say that Ron was suspicious because he didn't?!

I hear so many people say that someone didn't mention something until months later and that this raises a red flag. We have no idea when something was told to LE, since LE isn't telling us. In many cases, some information only comes out because a blogger says that his/her "sources" revealed it. If LE or the person themselves or a newspaper reporter then confirms it, then people think it's suspicious because it wasn't said earlier. Guess what - I bet there is LOTS of stuff that LE knows but we don't! Just because we don't find out until later doesn't mean that the person hid it.

 

[Wendy101]

I concur, Suspicious1. I've also wondered at the devotion to this man who is a stranger, devotion to his story even by Nancy Grace. He has lied about his work schedule. He told the pastor that came to his "rescue" in the beginning that he worked eight hours that day. That this pastor, who I suspect didn't know Ron well, or at all, actually went to the press with this story, shows how cunning Cummings is. How can a man work eight hours and also work 10-11 hours, as he and his attorney have stated? Just one of his lies, and it's a huge one. It's a :croc:!

I'd like to believe that LE has asked people (such as the press) not to leak what may be known regarding Ron's probable culpability, about Annette Sykes and Teresa Neves probable culpability, in the crime against HaLeigh. They are also involved in the lies about Ron's work hours that day or days (Feb, 9, 2009 OR Feb. 9 and 10, 2009).

Though some may find Ronald L. Cummings charming, charismatic, and believable, despite his lying to them, to me his words, and actions, and demeanor point to a man who could possibly be a psychopath. An underdeveloped man, lacking remorse and empathy, a person worried only for himself, a man lacking that quality that makes us fully human ~ a conscience. A person who lies as easily as he breathes. I see these traits in Annette Sykes as well, and see a wounded, vengeful woman in Teresa Neves. She is mostly a follower, I think, weaker than her son and mother, though their "strength" is not a positive one.
Ron is lying about when he worked because you cannot work different schedules within the same time frame. It defies reality, so it is a LIE. So, because Ron has lied about something extremely important, why should he be believed about anything, especially anything he says relating to the crime against his daughter?

MY OPINIONS

After reading Mr. Sykes obituary , I assume Ronald had a harsh upbringing, perhaps even worse that Mistys ever was.
He may have alot of negative energy due to his childhood.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

I assume he grilled Misty for details after he got home and was informed his child had disappeared out of the home. (As anyone would have in this situation.) He would have been able to repeat what she told him when asked. Unfortunately for him, he only knew the story she told him at that time and, as we all know, the details of her story has since changed many times.

Actually, RC himself stated he didn't question MC at all. Even though her story didn't add up, he stated he didn't question her as to why. He said he didn't question her as to why she said she was sleeping after he stated the bed hadn't been slept in and he said he didn't question how she was doing laundry after he stated there was no laundry soap. Don't have a link handy, but I know he said it more than once, one time was on NG. He also stated he didn't "grill" MC when he got home and "found Haleigh missing". He didn't question anything and he didn't even look around the home or neighborhood for Haleigh that night.

Also, he changed the story he was told. Originally, MC said Haleigh was sleeping in the same bed. RC changed it in one interview when MC said Haleigh was next to her - 3-4" away. RC said "No". MC said "No?" and RC said "She was 3-4 FEET away". Boom. New story.

Sorry, but I don't believe for a second that RC was just an innocent father coming home to find his daughter missing and had no information about what happened.


ETA: As far as RC having to "rely" on the story told to him -- WHY did he swear up and down the door had been broken in to while LE was stating it wasn't? WHY did he say him and MC passed their LDT's when we know MC didn't and haven't heard about his and LE wouldn't have even told him the results anyway? WHY would he lie about the fight with Joe after HIS family confirmed it? MOO -- he isn't relying on the "story" he's been told, he's relying on the fact he's always gotten away with EVERYTHING!

 

[nomoresorrow]

(BBM)

I assume he grilled Misty for details after he got home and was informed his child had disappeared out of the home. (As anyone would have in this situation.) He would have been able to repeat what she told him when asked. Unfortunately for him, he only knew the story she told him at that time and, as we all know, the details of her story has since changed many times.

Well Misty certainly didn't have much time to tell Ron anything considering the time that he supposedly got off/arrived home from work (and after stopping at the Kangaroo Express of course).

 

[debs]

But, Ron didn't load up his comments to the 911 Operator with unnecessary details, unlike Misty. How can we say that Misty was suspicious because she did add lots of trivia to her comments and then say that Ron was suspicious because he didn't?!

I hear so many people say that someone didn't mention something until months later and that this raises a red flag. We have no idea when something was told to LE, since LE isn't telling us. In many cases, some information only comes out because a blogger says that his/her "sources" revealed it. If LE or the person themselves or a newspaper reporter then confirms it, then people think it's suspicious because it wasn't said earlier. Guess what - I bet there is LOTS of stuff that LE knows but we don't! Just because we don't find out until later doesn't mean that the person hid it.

• 911: "OK, let me speak to him..."
  Ronald Cummings: "I just got home from work, my five-year-old daughter is gone- I need someone here now."
• 911: "OK, listen to me...listen to me...we've got two officers..."
  Ronald Cummings: "if I find whoever has my daughter before you all do, I'm killing them...I don't care- I will spend the rest of my life in prison....you can put that on the recording...I don't care."
  
• 911: "It's OK sir, we've got them on the way...ok- can you give me...what kind of description of pajamas was she wearing? "
  Ronald Cummings: "I don't f%$ know!

I agree, Ronald Cummings didn't know what pj's she was wearing. However, he did know her birthdate, and used the same expletive to answer that question. The other comments above, I bolded, to demonstrate unnecessary and unhelpful details. I don't think there's a person on this site, and we can rarely come together on the color of the standard font--much less a detail on this case, who believes anything Misty said on that 911 tape was helpful.

The bare bones statement is, Ron's first instinct is to provide an alibi (I was at work) and there are few analysts of 911 calls who aren't alerted to that occurrence.

 

[Wendy101]

Didn't they say that though right when the case was new? Over a year ago or more?

IMO, they haven't been twiddling their thumbs for 15 months. Much investigation has happened since they said that long ago, imo.

Why were they wanting people to come forward about Misty's whereabouts between 10 pm and 3 am if they didn't feel that was the time line when Haleigh went missing? :waitasec:

imo

I think that is because the LE said they do not believe Misty was even there that night. To be honest, I agree. Someone else was babysitting.

 

[suspicious1]

Actually, RC himself stated he didn't question MC at all. Even though her story didn't add up, he stated he didn't question her as to why. He said he didn't question her as to why she said she was sleeping after he stated the bed hadn't been slept in and he said he didn't question how she was doing laundry after he stated there was no laundry soap. Don't have a link handy, but I know he said it more than once, one time was on NG. He also stated he didn't "grill" MC when he got home and "found Haleigh missing". He didn't question anything and he didn't even look around the home or neighborhood for Haleigh that night.

Also, he changed the story he was told. Originally, MC said Haleigh was sleeping in the same bed. RC changed it in one interview when MC said Haleigh was next to her - 3-4" away. RC said "No". MC said "No?" and RC said "She was 3-4 FEET away". Boom. New story.

Sorry, but I don't believe for a second that RC was just an innocent father coming home to find his daughter missing and had no information about what happened.


ETA: As far as RC having to "rely" on the story told to him -- WHY did he swear up and down the door had been broken in to while LE was stating it wasn't? WHY did he say him and MC passed their LDT's when we know MC didn't and haven't heard about his and LE wouldn't have even told him the results anyway? WHY would he lie about the fight with Joe after HIS family confirmed it? MOO -- he isn't relying on the "story" he's been told, he's relying on the fact he's always gotten away with EVERYTHING!

YellowSub, that is exactly what Ron did. IMO, Ron had no reason to question her because he already knew what the truth was so no need for questioning. JMo though

 

[nomoresorrow]

(BBM)

I assume he grilled Misty for details after he got home and was informed his child had disappeared out of the home. (As anyone would have in this situation.) He would have been able to repeat what she told him when asked. Unfortunately for him, he only knew the story she told him at that time and, as we all know, the details of her story has since changed many times.

Sorry kamky, I missed this post - Again, according to the time Ronald got out of work and arrived home, after stopping at the store, he wouldn't have had time to have "grilled" Misty, as you said yourself, "anyone would in this situation", in order for the 911 call to have been made by/at 3:27 a.m.

 

[kamky]

Actually, RC himself stated he didn't question MC at all. Even though her story didn't add up, he stated he didn't question her as to why. He said he didn't question her as to why she said she was sleeping after he stated the bed hadn't been slept in and he said he didn't question how she was doing laundry after he stated there was no laundry soap. Don't have a link handy, but I know he said it more than once, one time was on NG. He also stated he didn't "grill" MC when he got home and "found Haleigh missing". He didn't question anything and he didn't even look around the home or neighborhood for Haleigh that night.

Also, he changed the story he was told. Originally, MC said Haleigh was sleeping in the same bed. RC changed it in one interview when MC said Haleigh was next to her - 3-4" away. RC said "No". MC said "No?" and RC said "She was 3-4 FEET away". Boom. New story.

Sorry, but I don't believe for a second that RC was just an innocent father coming home to find his daughter missing and had no information about what happened.


ETA: As far as RC having to "rely" on the story told to him -- WHY did he swear up and down the door had been broken in to while LE was stating it wasn't? WHY did he say him and MC passed their LDT's when we know MC didn't and haven't heard about his and LE wouldn't have even told him the results anyway? WHY would he lie about the fight with Joe after HIS family confirmed it? MOO -- he isn't relying on the "story" he's been told, he's relying on the fact he's always gotten away with EVERYTHING!

bbm

What I would find logical in this situation is for the person at home to say that the child has disappeared and the person walking into the house to say "WHAT?!!!" and ask some basic questions and then ask if 911 was called. If not, then I would think the person coming home would tell the person who had been there to call 911. I wouldn't expect the person coming home to ask endless questions until after 911 was called.

The original question I was responding to was "How is it that Ron was able to answer questions directed at Misty, when he was not there?". My answer is that a person should be able to repeat the basics that they were told.

Obviously, he would have continued to ask questions later and if Misty's answers changed then he would have repeated what he last understood. I probably shouldn't have used the word "grill" because it can mean different things to different people.

 

[Kimster]

This thread is starting to veer off track. It is about Ron's breaks and work schedule. Thanks.

 

[debs]

bbm

What I would find logical in this situation is for the person at home to say that the child has disappeared and the person walking into the house to say "WHAT?!!!" and ask some basic questions and then ask if 911 was called. If not, then I would think the person coming home would tell the person who had been there to call 911. I wouldn't expect the person coming home to ask endless questions until after 911 was called.

The original question I was responding to was "How is it that Ron was able to answer questions directed at Misty, when he was not there?". My answer is that a person should be able to repeat the basics that they were told.

Obviously, he would have continued to ask questions later and if Misty's answers changed then he would have repeated what he last understood. I probably shouldn't have used the word "grill" because it can mean different things to different people.

If that's the case, why couldn't Ron answer the question the 911 operator asked of him regarding what Haleigh was wearing? What basic questions did Ronald ask of Misty which he then conveyed to the 911 operator, at all?

"I don't F#$#ING KNOW!" seems to be the only one, and at least it jibes with Misty's convoluted and syntactically poor responses. But it still begs the question why he needed to provide an alibi and a threat of violence and murder (he threatened to kill).

 

[kamky]

Actually, RC himself stated he didn't question MC at all. Even though her story didn't add up, he stated he didn't question her as to why. He said he didn't question her as to why she said she was sleeping after he stated the bed hadn't been slept in and he said he didn't question how she was doing laundry after he stated there was no laundry soap. Don't have a link handy, but I know he said it more than once, one time was on NG. He also stated he didn't "grill" MC when he got home and "found Haleigh missing". He didn't question anything and he didn't even look around the home or neighborhood for Haleigh that night.

Also, he changed the story he was told. Originally, MC said Haleigh was sleeping in the same bed. RC changed it in one interview when MC said Haleigh was next to her - 3-4" away. RC said "No". MC said "No?" and RC said "She was 3-4 FEET away". Boom. New story.

Sorry, but I don't believe for a second that RC was just an innocent father coming home to find his daughter missing and had no information about what happened.


ETA: As far as RC having to "rely" on the story told to him -- WHY did he swear up and down the door had been broken in to while LE was stating it wasn't? WHY did he say him and MC passed their LDT's when we know MC didn't and haven't heard about his and LE wouldn't have even told him the results anyway? WHY would he lie about the fight with Joe after HIS family confirmed it? MOO -- he isn't relying on the "story" he's been told, he's relying on the fact he's always gotten away with EVERYTHING!

bbm

I always understood this to simply be a correction from Ron when Misty mistakenly used the word "inches" when she meant "feet". Certainly if someone says "inches" for "feet" or "yards" for "miles", etc., it should be corrected because it's just wrong. I do agree with you that Misty changed her story and originally said that Haleigh was sleeping in the same bed. Later she said that Haleigh was sleeping in the little bed located close to the large bed. But these are two different things. Ron correcting her word error is not the same as inventing a new story.

 

[jessigirl]

In your assertion, Ron came home from work and discovered his daughter missing. That's incorrect: Ron had left work and had gone to a convenience store and purchased 3 specific items (beer, peanuts, and cigarettes), and then came home. If his intention was to rattle off what he'd been doing when he discovered his child missing, he excluded the part about stopping at the store. He was not totally honest. In fact, it wasn't until quite some time later we discovered he'd stopped at all.

Am not speaking about you directly, debs, when I say that so many ppl here state that Ron's entire REASON OR NEED for making that stop at the store for the beer, cigs&nuts was for the sole purpose of a video taped and time stamped alibi. But then when need be the exact same circumstance ppl state was premeditated and manipulating an alibi is then used against him saying he lied.

 

[debs]

Am not speaking about you directly, debs, when I say that so many ppl here state that Ron's entire REASON OR NEED for making that stop at the store for the beer, cigs&nuts was for the sole purpose of a video taped and time stamped alibi. But then when need be the exact same circumstance ppl state was premeditated and manipulating an alibi is then used against him saying he lied.

I'll take a shot: he was giving an alibi (I was at work) and established an alibi at a convenience store. Why the need for either?

The 911 operator never asked him where he'd been.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

This thread is starting to veer off track. It is about Ron's breaks and work schedule. Thanks.

:blushing:

Your job is never done . . . . sorry!

 

[debs]

In defense of posts I've made recently in this thread, the most we know of Ron's work schedule is what he said on that 911 tape. It is adding in the things we know now, tying them to that, which draws my attention, and makes the work schedule suspect in it's whole design. If I cannot trust his statement "I just got home from work" ..... I cannot trust much else. As someone else pointed out, punching out from PDM at 3 a.m., getting to his car, driving toward home and then past it and stopping at the convenience store, getting out, going in, getting three specific items, going back to the car, and driving home finally, takes more than 30 minutes.....and the call was made by 3:27.

 

[cluciano63]

To me the most amazing and intriguing part of all of this mystery surrounding the hours of the shift and when RC was actually there at the plant and when he left...is the fact that no one else who works there seems to have talked to the media either...and you would think that by now, some people have quit or been fired, so would not be under any obligation not to talk, and might just want some attention and say, "hey, I know for a fact RC came in at and left at 'cuz I was werkin' that night too..." Where are all these co-workers and how has this little detail managed to stay so top secret after almost 16 months? That's what is most interesting about this whole thing, as far as werk-hours go...

 

[kamky]

• 911: "OK, let me speak to him..."
  Ronald Cummings: "I just got home from work, my five-year-old daughter is gone- I need someone here now."
• 911: "OK, listen to me...listen to me...we've got two officers..."
  Ronald Cummings: "if I find whoever has my daughter before you all do, I'm killing them...I don't care- I will spend the rest of my life in prison....you can put that on the recording...I don't care."
  
• 911: "It's OK sir, we've got them on the way...ok- can you give me...what kind of description of pajamas was she wearing? "
  Ronald Cummings: "I don't f%$ know!

I agree, Ronald Cummings didn't know what pj's she was wearing. However, he did know her birthdate, and used the same expletive to answer that question. The other comments above, I bolded, to demonstrate unnecessary and unhelpful details. I don't think there's a person on this site, and we can rarely come together on the color of the standard font--much less a detail on this case, who believes anything Misty said on that 911 tape was helpful.

The bare bones statement is, Ron's first instinct is to provide an alibi (I was at work) and there are few analysts of 911 calls who aren't alerted to that occurrence.

If I just walked in the door and was handed the phone to talk to 911, my first instinct would be to say I just walked in the door! So I don't see how this would be an "unnecessary detail".

Profanity is probably not unusual for a man like Ron when he's upset, and this would be an upsetting situation, so I don't see how cussing would be considered giving "details".

There are two definitions of "alibi": a. A form of defense whereby a defendant attempts to prove that he or she was elsewhere when the crime in question was committed, and b. The fact of having been elsewhere when a crime in question was committed. We don't know for sure which one is valid here, but LE has indicated that Ron worked OT and got home just before the 911 call (based on the convenience store video) and is not considered a "suspect".

I do agree 100% that nothing Misty said on that 911 tape was helpful!

Sorry, Kimster, if this is a bit OT, but I did want to reply to a question directed my way.