Tommy Croslin claims mistreatment in Putman Jail per Att

  • #181
Considering Ronald has said he is going to kill the person responsible for what happened to his daughter, is it really the smartest to put Tommy and Ronald together? What is Tommy had something on Ron, and Ron killed him under the guise of I thought you killed my daughter? Now, we dont know if Tommy and Ronald are together, but if they are, thats not the smartest thing to do.

And I hope Werter can prove it.

BBM

Chablis, I have bolded a couple of sentences in your post that I would like to answer.

I was a Booking and Classification Lieutenant at our parish (Louisiana) jail/correctional center. I do not believe that any jail would place Tommy and Ronald in the same unit because they are 'known enemies'. Classification guidelines would not permit it.

I also do not think for one moment that Ronald would try to kill anyone in jail. I personally do not think he would even have the courage to do so.

MOO, JMO, & IMHO
 
  • #182
Wonder if the 'unknown civilian attired parties' Werter refers to are FBI agents?

I hope Werter can prove he was indeed Tommy's attorney in other areas than the drug charges. The one statement Werter made to cover himself in that motion did not even make sense. I will quote it verbatim - (D) That they made promises that they are unauthorized to submitted regarding his drug cases if he spoke to them regarding criminal activity.'

Bolded. WTH does that mean? Is Werter referring to Haleigh's case in that statement? I am not intelligent enough to understand that poorly worded statement.

Good luck, Mr. Werter. I just do not think this is going to fly.

JMO
 
  • #183
The way I’m looking at Tommy Croslin’s situation, he has a lot more to fear from the actions of his own attorney than he has from LE. IMO, something’s simply not right with Werter’s actions. If I remember correctly, chronologically Werter’s representation of Tommy has gone down something in this order:

-Werter becomes Tommy’s attorney of record. I’m not sure how that came about.

-Werter wanted Tommy to take a polygraph.

-Tommy failed the polygraph.

-Werter tells AH that he no longer represents Tommy in matters regarding Haleigh’s investigation.

-Tommy asks Lindsey, through Granny Flo, to have his attorney come see him right away. He has something to tell him.

-Werter shows up at the jail with Crystal Sheffield’s private investigator to hear what Tommy has to say.

-Even though his client had proven he was a liar, without verifying any aspect of Tommy’s story, Werter IMMEDIATELY places Tommy in front of the PCSO, FDLE, and FBI to tell his story! Within 24 hours Tommy was at the dock with investigators.

-Within 36 hours, the search at Shell Harbor was underway, the PI was all over the media claiming he had solved the case, and Werter was on national media placing his client at the scene of the crime and pretty much acknowledging his participation at some level.

-The search fizzled out.

-Werter allows Tommy to plead guilty to his charges without a deal. How could Werter even remotely consider it being in his client’s best interests to plead guilty with no deal on the table? If you have no deal, you don’t know what the prosecutor is going to recommend, or how the judge is leaning.

-Now, before sentence can even be imposed for the guilty plea, Werter has decided to file a Complaint alleging improper conduct on the part of LE! If LE is now pizzed at Tommy, and I’m sure they are, then the prosecutors are angry at Tommy. This could easily rub off and don’t be surprised if the judge is also angry at Tommy. How do you like Tommy’s chances for a favorable sentencing recommendation NOW?

In what may be his crowning coup de gras, Werter shows up on JVL last week and proclaimed that Tommy was not guilty of FELONY murder! As in the door’s wide open for other forms of murder charges? Tommy Croslin might be well served to open his eyes.

The very ones he’s presently slamming with this new Motion may actually be his ONLY true friends.
 
  • #184
Great post, Concerned Papa!

Tommy and Mr. Werter slammed the Jail officials and LE all in one swoop. I do think that it was not the smartest thing to do.

JMO
 
  • #185
**Concerned Papa**
Thank-you for your thoughts, I totally agree. The only other thing that keeps going through my mind, Tommy and Misty have NEVER told the truth, or if they have I'm not aware of it. Too bad they can't give them the 'Truth Serum' drug. So, Tommy's atty. believes everything Tommy says and now we're supposed to believe it too.
I'm thrilled he is in general population, let the sweating begin. I only wish Misty's accommodations were identical to his.
If Tommy did this alone, Misty would have already thrown him under the bus, and vice versa. In my mind, they are both equally to blame.
JMO
Thanks for letting me vent...I don't post often but this ruffled my feathers.
 
  • #186
The way I’m looking at Tommy Croslin’s situation, he has a lot more to fear from the actions of his own attorney than he has from LE. IMO, something’s simply not right with Werter’s actions. If I remember correctly, chronologically Werter’s representation of Tommy has gone down something in this order:

-Werter becomes Tommy’s attorney of record. I’m not sure how that came about.

-Werter wanted Tommy to take a polygraph.

-Tommy failed the polygraph.

-Werter tells AH that he no longer represents Tommy in matters regarding Haleigh’s investigation.

-Tommy asks Lindsey, through Granny Flo, to have his attorney come see him right away. He has something to tell him.

-Werter shows up at the jail with Crystal Sheffield’s private investigator to hear what Tommy has to say.

-Even though his client had proven he was a liar, without verifying any aspect of Tommy’s story, Werter IMMEDIATELY places Tommy in front of the PCSO, FDLE, and FBI to tell his story! Within 24 hours Tommy was at the dock with investigators.

-Within 36 hours, the search at Shell Harbor was underway, the PI was all over the media claiming he had solved the case, and Werter was on national media placing his client at the scene of the crime and pretty much acknowledging his participation at some level.

-The search fizzled out.

-Werter allows Tommy to plead guilty to his charges without a deal. How could Werter even remotely consider it being in his client’s best interests to plead guilty with no deal on the table? If you have no deal, you don’t know what the prosecutor is going to recommend, or how the judge is leaning.

-Now, before sentence can even be imposed for the guilty plea, Werter has decided to file a Complaint alleging improper conduct on the part of LE! If LE is now pizzed at Tommy, and I’m sure they are, then the prosecutors are angry at Tommy. This could easily rub off and don’t be surprised if the judge is also angry at Tommy. How do you like Tommy’s chances for a favorable sentencing recommendation NOW?

In what may be his crowning coup de gras, Werter shows up on JVL last week and proclaimed that Tommy was not guilty of FELONY murder! As in the door’s wide open for other forms of murder charges? Tommy Croslin might be well served to open his eyes.

The very ones he’s presently slamming with this new Motion may actually be his ONLY true friends.
the weirdest thing is that guilty plea...all of that trouble for nothing? it made me wonder if someone 'advised' Werter that this was the best route, & they'd go easy on Tommy? with that 'good working relationship', he might've just believed it. That's what I see with Werter...he's not used to LE's lies & has taken all of their promises at face value. big mistake. It's also a mistake to believe anything Tommy says. Tommy has a right to representation, & the best strategy might be for Werter to take the worst case scenario, assume that Tommy is guilty of it, & work from there. & if Tommy doesn't like that strategy, he can change it with the truth. because the way that Werter is presently working, (trusting Tommy), is just causing them to trip up on their own words. & it took too long for Werter to realize that LE isn't their friend. That should've been rule #1.
 
  • #187
Tommy pleading guilty, really surprised me. I didn't expect him to get a deal, because the story he was telling, implicated himself too much, but I didn't expect him to go down so easily. Did Werter, once realizing they had' been had', just throw up his hands, & say 'this is your best bet'? or is Tommy desperate, to as quickly as he can, get out of Dodge? That's what these accusations feel like to me. Tommy wanting to lay low, & to be left alone, so he can be sentenced, & then move on. Away from the Haleigh case. Tommy was pretty confident that he was gonna get those 3 years, so for him to plead guilty, says something major is going on. What could possibly make the time he's looking at now, (compared to that 3 years), look good? unless...he is still banking on that 3 years & his involvement was something that would render a much heftier sentence. Is there something besides murder, that would get him at least 20?
 
  • #188
Wonder if the 'unknown civilian attired parties' Werter refers to are FBI agents?

I hope Werter can prove he was indeed Tommy's attorney in other areas than the drug charges. The one statement Werter made to cover himself in that motion did not even make sense. I will quote it verbatim - (D) That they made promises that they are unauthorized to submitted regarding his drug cases if he spoke to them regarding criminal activity.'

Bolded. WTH does that mean? Is Werter referring to Haleigh's case in that statement? I am not intelligent enough to understand that poorly worded statement.

Good luck, Mr. Werter. I just do not think this is going to fly.

JMO

My guess is that "(D) That they made promises that they are unauthorized to submitted regarding his drug cases if he spoke to them regarding criminal activity.'" = If Tommy tells them what appened to Haleigh, anything he says that might affect his drug charges will be off the record.

After seeing Mr Werter on JVM, it's clear that he is a master of doublespeak and spin. He talked a lot but didn't say a darn thing. He even had JVM and the panel going in circles trying to figure out if he said anything and what it was. It was pretty funny because they basically gave up. Since Tommy is a known liar and his atty is a spin expert, I wouldn't believe a word from either of them. JMO.

I agree with the post that the individuals in question may have been FBI.
 
  • #189
Wonder if the 'unknown civilian attired parties' Werter refers to are FBI agents?

I hope Werter can prove he was indeed Tommy's attorney in other areas than the drug charges. The one statement Werter made to cover himself in that motion did not even make sense. I will quote it verbatim - (D) That they made promises that they are unauthorized to submitted regarding his drug cases if he spoke to them regarding criminal activity.'

Bolded. WTH does that mean? Is Werter referring to Haleigh's case in that statement? I am not intelligent enough to understand that poorly worded statement.

Good luck, Mr. Werter. I just do not think this is going to fly.

JMO

Werter didn't have to be Tommy's attorney. Just the fact Tommy stated that he wanted an attorney present then the questioning had to stop until an attorney was present whoever that might be. Everyone has the right to council when being questioned and if LE over stepped those bounds and denied him council they broke the law. If they denied Tommy council then Tommy has got them right there on a technicality period. LE may have just screw this whole case because of it. I've seen guilty criminals get off because the arresting officer didn't read them their rights when they arrested them.

I know that LE must be extremely frustrated at this point with all the players. And who could blame them for them rattling these folks but there is a protocal they have to follow period. Remember, you're innocient until proven guilty.
 
  • #190
We've failed to mentioned that Tommy pleading guilty takes the role of "star witness" for the prosecution right out of Ronald's hands. There will be no witnesses called, as he is pleading guilty as charged. Werter didn't talk Tommy into pleading guilty, Tommy told Werter he wanted to plead, and start serving his time so he could get his sentence behind him. If it doesn't come out as Werter expects it to, he can file an appeal just like Hope did. Nothing lost, but Tommy will have more months served under his belt, toward his sentence. I'm not sure about the charges Tommy filed against LE. He will be sentenced for his drug charge by that time, and I assume he will be in prison when the charges are heard. Can't wait to see how all the players are sentenced! I'm thinking some will not be treated quite as fairly as the others.
 
  • #191
Did anyone find out what it means on Tommy's court docket?

07/02/2010 42 PROHIBITION REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED HEARING

I searched that a bunch. Can't find it, but did shorten it to prohibition request as different things applied to it. I got this.

Definitions of writ of prohibition on the Web:

a judicial writ from a higher court ordering a lower court not to exercise jurisdiction in a particular case

wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn


A writ of prohibition, in the United States, is an official legal document drafted and issued by a supreme court or superior court to a judge presiding over a suit in an inferior court. ...
en.

wikipedia.org/wiki/Writ_of_prohibition

I liked it. Don't know how it would exactly apply, if at all, can only guess and have a few, but it's interesting as all get out to me!


Just spoke to someone involved in Florida Law. What was explained to me was that the PROHIBITION REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED HEARING was simply a request to get a fast hearing to stop anyone/everyone from talking to his client. But I also learned that LE can talk to the inmate about anything NOT concerning what the inmate is charged for. LE can say anything in an interview with this inmate as long as it does not have anything to do with what this person was charged for.

As far as I know the attorney that filed the complaint is not representing TC in this matter.
 
  • #192
Just spoke to someone involved in Florida Law. What was explained to me was that the PROHIBITION REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED HEARING was simply a request to get a fast hearing to stop anyone/everyone from talking to his client. But I also learned that LE can talk to the inmate about anything NOT concerning what the inmate is charged for. LE can say anything in an interview with this inmate as long as it does not have anything to do with what this person was charged for.

As far as I know the attorney that filed the complaint is not representing TC in this matter.


Hold the bus! So, you are saying that a person can be brought in off the streets, not having been charged with anything, but being questioned about a crime, and if they ask for an attorney, they can't have one because they haven't been charged? Huh?
 
  • #193
I think if LE wants to talk about the weather, and TC request his attorney, they have to comply!
 
  • #194
Hold the bus! So, you are saying that a person can be brought in off the streets, not having been charged with anything, but being questioned about a crime, and if they ask for an attorney, they can't have one because they haven't been charged? Huh?

NO, of course I'm not saying that. Sorry if I wrote it wrong. I am addressing the situation of an "inmate" not someone on the street. I stated that LE can talk to an "inmate" about anything they want except for what they are in jail for. In Tommy's case that is the drug charges. Of course Tommy can request an attorney be present when he was interviewed. . I doubt he did that. The officers that interviewed Tommy are seasoned LE and I seriously doubt they drug him out of his cell and "made him talk" I could be wrong..but I just can't see it going the way Tommy said because he lies and I have respect for LE.
 
  • #195
Great to 'see' you, badme!

I absolutely agree with every word of your post! I personally do not believe a word of the allegations.

For Tommy and any of the rest of them....................:boohoo:

Just spoke to someone involved in Florida Law. What was explained to me was that the PROHIBITION REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED HEARING was simply a request to get a fast hearing to stop anyone/everyone from talking to his client. But I also learned that LE can talk to the inmate about anything NOT concerning what the inmate is charged for. LE can say anything in an interview with this inmate as long as it does not have anything to do with what this person was charged for.

As far as I know the attorney that filed the complaint is not representing TC in this matter.

Exactly, KSH, Tommy has not been charged with anything regarding Haliegh. They can sit him down and ask him questions, he doesn't have to answer them. He can ask if he is being charged.

What most likely happened is they dragged his butt into a room and read him the riot act and didn't even ask him a question. It was not an interview or an interrogation. Of course, TC would say it was, but legally, I say nope, it wasn't.

He did not need an attorney when he wasn't even charged with a crime. The drug case was not what they were yelling about so Werter has no support in his motion, imo.
 
  • #196
http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/False-Confessions.php?gclid=CLTI9fmT06ICFRE95QodoVsxyw

False Confessions

In about 25% of DNA exoneration cases, innocent defendants made incriminating statements, delivered outright confessions or pled guilty.

These cases show that confessions are not always prompted by internal knowledge or actual guilt, but are sometimes motivated by external influences.

Why do innocent people confess?
A variety of factors can contribute to a false confession during a police interrogation. Many cases have included a combination of several of these causes. They include:





duress

coercion

intoxication

diminished capacity

mental impairment

ignorance of the law

fear of violence

the actual infliction of harm

the threat of a harsh sentence

Misunderstanding the situation



Some false confessions can be explained by the mental state of the confessor.





Confessions obtained from juveniles are often unreliable – children can be easy to manipulate and are not always fully aware of their situation. Children and adults both are often convinced that that they can “go home” as soon as they admit guilt.

People with mental disabilities have often falsely confessed because they are tempted to accommodate and agree with authority figures. Further, many law enforcement interrogators are not given any special training on questioning suspects with mental disabilities. An impaired mental state due to mental illness, drugs or alcohol may also elicit false admissions of guilt.

Mentally capable adults also give false confessions due to a variety of factors like the length of interrogation, exhaustion or a belief that they can be released after confessing and prove their innocence later.



Regardless of the age, capacity or state of the confessor, what they often have in common is a decision – at some point during the interrogation process – that confessing will be more beneficial to them than continuing to maintain their innocence.

From threats to torture
Sometimes law enforcement use harsh interrogation tactics with uncooperative suspects. But some police officers, convinced of a suspect’s guilt, occasionally use tactics so persuasive that an innocent person feels compelled to confess. Some suspects have confessed to avoid physical harm or discomfort. Others are told they will be convicted with or without a confession, and that their sentence will be more lenient if they confess. Some are told a confession is the only way to avoid the death penalty.

Recording of interrogations
The Innocence Project has recommended specific changes in the practice of suspect interrogations in the U.S., including the mandatory electronic recording of interrogations, which has been shown to decrease the number of false confessions and increase the reliability of confessions as evidence. Read more about recommended policy reforms to prevent false confessio
 
  • #197
From the same web site.

Featured Case: Eddie Joe Lloyd
Lloyd was convicted of the 1984 murder of a 16-year-old girl in Detroit after he wrote to police with suggestions on how to solve various recent crimes. During several interviews, police fed details of the crime to Lloyd, who was mentally ill, and convinced him that by confessing he was helping them “smoke out” the real killer. Lloyd eventually signed a confession and gave a tape-recorded statement. The jury deliberated less than an hour before convicting him and the judge said at sentencing that execution, which had been outlawed in Michigan, would have been the “only justifiable sentence” if it were available. In 2002, DNA testing proved that Lloyd was innocent and he was exonerated. As mandated in a settlement with Lloyd’s family, Detroit Police officials said in 2006 they would start videotaping all interrogations in crimes that could carry a sentence of life.



Read Lloyd’s full profile.
 
  • #198
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning

.[23] Generally, incarceration or imprisonment constitutes custody. However, Miranda is not offense-specific. Therefore, a person who is incarcerated could not be interrogated about any offense regardless of whether the questioning related to the offense for which she is incarcerated or any other offense absent a valid
 
  • #199
Oops, Left off the last 2 words.

Miranda waiver
 
  • #200
If he wasn't interrogated or questioned and I don't think he was, they do not need to give him a Miranda Warning. If they did Werter would do more than file a Prohibition motion.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
118
Guests online
1,157
Total visitors
1,275

Forum statistics

Threads
632,433
Messages
18,626,444
Members
243,149
Latest member
Pgc123
Back
Top