Tommy Croslin claims mistreatment in Putman Jail per Att

[Zoe Bogart]

http://www.news4jax.com/news/24242370/detail.html

Judge Rules Against Croslin's Motion

PUTNAM COUNTY, Fla. -- A Putnam County judge has ruled against Hank Croslin Jr., who claimed detectives threatened him and treated him poorly in jail.

Croslin is the brother of Misty Cummings, the last person known to have seen 5-year-old Haleigh Cummings before she disappeared last year.

Croslin's motion claimed detectives threatened to charge him with Haleigh's murder if he didn't cooperate. As a result, he wanted to be moved out of the Putnam County Jail.

But the judge dismissed the motion, saying Croslin is not being harassed by detectives and they have every right to question him about Haleigh's disappearance.

Croslin is set to be sentenced on drug charges Aug. 2.

Well, well, well. That puts a whole new spin on Werter's claim he and Tommy dropped the hearing because they and PCSO made an agreement.

Looks like the judge saw NO REASON for a hearing on Tommy's complaints after all. The judge says TC can be questioned about Haleigh.

 

[Whisperer]

Yes, he can be questioned about Haleigh. He doesn't have to answer but he can be questioned. I suspect he answered...

 

[Concerned Papa]

Well, well, to use Mr. Werter's own words from his YouTube response to me, I finally have a VERY "clear view of the situation".

But the judge dismissed the motion, saying Croslin is not being harassed by detectives and they have every right to question him about Haleigh's disappearance.

http://www.news4jax.com/news/24242370/detail.html

Werter said he requested the hearing be dropped after investigators agreed not to talk to Croslin without him present.

http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2...tion-cancelled

Tommy Croslin is not the only liar. How's that for some irony?

 

[Zoe Bogart]

Well, well, to use Mr. Werter's own words from his YouTube response to me, I finally have a VERY "clear view of the situation".

Tommy Croslin is not the only liar. How's that for some irony?

It's been said lawyers are liars by profession and the reason they like to go before a jury is to see which liar/lawyer can fool the most people. :dance: Werter hasn't fooled many of us here at Websleuths.

 

[KSH352]

Well, well, to use Mr. Werter's own words from his YouTube response to me, I finally have a VERY "clear view of the situation".






Tommy Croslin is not the only liar. How's that for some irony?

I totally agree. Werter stepped on his own toes in the one. Although there are some that still want to think Tommy was mistreated, I do not. Tommy is a liar and I'm not sure how Werter discerns the truth from his client. You would think after failing a poly on pertinent information about the HaLeigh Cummings case Werter would have learned that his client is subject to not being forthright and twisting facts for his own good.

I still stand on the fact the Tommy put himself at the scene when the crime to HaLeigh happened. I trust PCSO and I for one hope they keep the heat on this man so he may tell the truth as to what happened to HaLeigh.

 

[Bobbisangel]

Well, if they have to resort to threatening to tell the other prisoners he's going to be charged for murder it sounds like they haven't got the evidence to charge him. Otherwise they'd just charge him and make his life living hell in court instead of making other inmates do it for them.

Maybe he's just whining though because the new cell sucks but his lawyer may suspect that complaining about the AC and the plumbing isn't going to get him moved.

I wouldn't doubt that everything Tommy is saying is the truth. LE is allowed to do just about anything they want to get a confession out of a person. We hear about it all of the time. They use all kinds of tactics in the hope of getting someone/anyone to admit that they did it. Look at all of the money states have paid to people who weren't guilty but spent years in prison. You would think LE would learn. I think the tactics that they use should be against the law.

If Tommy is telling the truth I hope it all comes to light and the cops are fired...sure they will be!! They should be knocked down a notch though. I hate cops like that.

 

[Dion]

Yes, he can be questioned about Haleigh. He doesn't have to answer but he can be questioned. I suspect he answered...

I was thinking that maybe (hopefully) he told them some things that he regretted, and that was the reason for all this.

He could have had second thoughts about answering their questions and wanted to retract whatever he said.

 

[Concerned Papa]

I wouldn't doubt that everything Tommy is saying is the truth. LE is allowed to do just about anything they want to get a confession out of a person. We hear about it all of the time. They use all kinds of tactics in the hope of getting someone/anyone to admit that they did it. Look at all of the money states have paid to people who weren't guilty but spent years in prison. You would think LE would learn. I think the tactics that they use should be against the law.

If Tommy is telling the truth I hope it all comes to light and the cops are fired...sure they will be!! They should be knocked down a notch though. I hate cops like that.

BBM

How very odd! I feel EXACTLY the same about any documented liar who fails a polygraph involving a missing child.

 

[OneLostGrl]

They can talk over Mountain Dew and smokes, right? I think subtle interrogation was going on and yet Werter allowed that trip? Very fine line these folks are walking. JMO

They do it often.. more often than not, IMO.

 

[OneLostGrl]

I think Tommy probably didn't mind the conversation too much when he was smoking the cig's LE was probably giving him... or the big mac.

 

[twall]

Here are the latest entries in Tommy's trafficking court docket:

07/06/2010 43 SENTENCING MINUTES: COURT ORDERED CASE CONTINUED TO

07/06/2010 43 NEXT SENTENCING 08/06/2010

07/06/2010 44 NOTICE TO ATTORNEY (08-06-2010)

07/06/2010 45 NOTICE TO DEFENDANT (08-06-2010)

07/08/2010 46 MOTION TO STRIKE AND/OR DISMISS THE DEFENDANTS MOTION

07/08/2010 46 FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND ORDER OF PROHIBITION

Am I understanding this correctly? The state submitted a motion to the court to strike and/or dismiss the show cause/prohibition motion Werter submitted to the court and the judge ruled in the state's favor. The judge's ruling doesn't show up on the docket yet.
This is how I am deciphering the latest court docket entries, I could be wrong, if I am please correct me. I am no law wiz but I am getting schooled with this case and CA's case, that's for sure!

 

[Bobbisangel]

BBM

How very odd! I feel EXACTLY the same about any documented liar who fails a polygraph involving a missing child.

Polygraphs aren't that reliable. Recently I heard they are 88 to 90% correct.

Tommy has been pretty worthless as a person, husband, and father, but that doesn't make it right if the cops said what he said they did. Forcing or trying to scare a confession out of a person that might be innocet will only backfire in the long run. We want the person who hurt Haleigh to be arrested and end up in prison forever.

 

[dodie20]

http://www.news4jax.com/news/24242370/detail.html

after reading this, I can't help but think Werter's accusations were 'exagerated'. (to put it nicely). A judge said Tommy is not being harassed. What happened to Tommy being FORCIBLY removed from his cell, & being denied access to his lawyer? I wonder what really happened in that meeting, & what Tommy really said. From early reports, I had a vision of Tommy being pulled out by his arms & legs, being dragged into a dark, smokey little room, & cops threatening to sick the meanest inmates on him. (not that I much cared). Oh well...so much for Tommy & his DRAMA.

 

[lonetraveler]

I'm thinking that Tommy may have a bit of regret about something he may have spilled during the "smoking and Mountain Dew break" and now wants what he said "under duress" swept clean from the proverbial slate. Maybe this is the reason that he is whinning that he was "forced" to say these things.............Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

 

[krkrjx]

I'm thinking that Tommy may have a bit of regret about something he may have spilled during the "smoking and Mountain Dew break" and now wants what he said "under duress" swept clean from the proverbial slate. Maybe this is the reason that he is whinning that he was "forced" to say these things.............Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

Or, he was not wise enough to see a problem but his attorney thought it best to do some damage control. "You said what?!!" ...and then attempted to get certain statement(s) labeled "under duress."

 

[Whisperer]

Polygraphs aren't that reliable. Recently I heard they are 88 to 90% correct.

Tommy has been pretty worthless as a person, husband, and father, but that doesn't make it right if the cops said what he said they did. Forcing or trying to scare a confession out of a person that might be innocet will only backfire in the long run. We want the person who hurt Haleigh to be arrested and end up in prison forever.

bbm

might be innocent is the key word. I am all for cops trying to force a confession or get information from a likely candidate. TC is a likely candidate. I don't they the forced anything. I think TC gave something up and regrets it and I don't think he was mistreated unless ciggs and sodas are under the guise of torture.

 

[1Chump]

Well, well, to use Mr. Werter's own words from his YouTube response to me, I finally have a VERY "clear view of the situation".


Quote:
But the judge dismissed the motion, saying Croslin is not being harassed by detectives and they have every right to question him about Haleigh's disappearance.

http://www.news4jax.com/news/24242370/detail.html



Quote:
Werter said he requested the hearing be dropped after investigators agreed not to talk to Croslin without him present.

http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2...tion-cancelled



Tommy Croslin is not the only liar. How's that for some irony?

IThe Jacksonville story is correct. News4Jax is wrong.

A Judge does not "dismiss" a motion. A Judge rules on a motion by issuing an "Order" either granting or denying the motion. A dismissal can only be done prior to the hearing by the moving party (Tommy).

The Judge never ruled on the motion. There is no order from the Judge period.

This tells us that News4Jax does not accurately report but includes speculation by reporters who do not understand our legal system.

 

[1Chump]

Well, well, well. That puts a whole new spin on Werter's claim he and Tommy dropped the hearing because they and PCSO made an agreement.

Looks like the judge saw NO REASON for a hearing on Tommy's complaints after all. The judge says TC can be questioned about Haleigh.

Werter claim is correct....Werter dismissed the motion. The Judge did not make any ruling.

The reporter speculated on why the motion was dismissed. The speculation was wrong.

 

[Concerned Papa]

IThe Jacksonville story is correct. News4Jax is wrong.

A Judge does not "dismiss" a motion. A Judge rules on a motion by issuing an "Order" either granting or denying the motion. A dismissal can only be done prior to the hearing by the moving party (Tommy).

The Judge never ruled on the motion. There is no order from the Judge period.

This tells us that News4Jax does not accurately report but includes speculation by reporters who do not understand our legal system.

Hmmm, that certainly seems strange to a non attorney such as myself. We've all seen Judges dismiss murder charges, etc. for lack of evidence.

You're saying a Judge can't dismiss a Motion for the same reason?

 

[1Chump]

Here are the latest entries in Tommy's trafficking court docket:

07/06/2010 43 SENTENCING MINUTES: COURT ORDERED CASE CONTINUED TO

07/06/2010 43 NEXT SENTENCING 08/06/2010

07/06/2010 44 NOTICE TO ATTORNEY (08-06-2010)

07/06/2010 45 NOTICE TO DEFENDANT (08-06-2010)

07/08/2010 46 MOTION TO STRIKE AND/OR DISMISS THE DEFENDANTS MOTION

07/08/2010 46 FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND ORDER OF PROHIBITION

Am I understanding this correctly? The state submitted a motion to the court to strike and/or dismiss the show cause/prohibition motion Werter submitted to the court and the judge ruled in the state's favor. The judge's ruling doesn't show up on the docket yet.
This is how I am deciphering the latest court docket entries, I could be wrong, if I am please correct me. I am no law wiz but I am getting schooled with this case and CA's case, that's for sure!

You are correct except for the Judge's ruling. Werter dimissed his motion prior to the Judge ruling on the motion.

IMO, moving parties only dismiss their motions when they get what they want. In this case, Werter's priority was for LE to agree to not question Tommy without his presences and they did.

IMO, as far as the other claims, no way would LE ever admit to those claims. They would be opening themselves up to claims and/or lawsuits by other inmates. IMO, those were in there as a warning only and the warning was received. I am not saying they are true in any way.