Haleigh Marie Cummings #35 4/22/10 - 5/04/10

[no rose colored glasses]

I was reading that in 2005 Lindsy had pressed charges for domestic violence, but then dropped the charges. I am under the impression, and could be wrong that her family is reasonably well off, and maybe they are helping her financially and did what ever they could to get her away from that clan. I know if that was my daughter I would have done everything in my power to show her the light, and wouldn't have given up until she listened. She did make a comment to Tommy that she didn't want to lose her whole family.

[Brandi]

LC: You know when they tell you you are not going to have a husband no more, it is scary.

---

Scary but very true.

Not only does he have the trafficking charge, but he has other cases pending too.

It appears he will be a main player in the Haleigh case. (Lindsay's final straw)

I don't think Tommy will be seeing the light of day for a long time.

When Werter runs his trap... all I can hear is Charlie Brown's teacher in my ear

saying: Wah Wah Wah.... Wah Wah Wah WAHHHHHHHH!!! 

Agreed!

BBM= I just wonder what tidbit she was told that made her realize he is involved in Haleigh's disappearance. And by whom.

About Werter, such a great analogy! LOL

[Tamikosmom]

Considering that the truth encompassing those who participated in the happening and those who had knowledge regarding the night Haleigh Cummings went missing remains elusive ... I refuse to give Lindsey Croslin a pass.

It appears that possible repercussions which can affect Lindsey personally are beginning to surface and ... Lindsey is panicking.  In other words ... it is all about Lindsey ... not Haleigh.

Think about it.  A divorce can protect her financial stability considering her husband is facing over a $250,000 find but ... why is she concerned about losing her children if she had no part ... no knowledge ... in regards to what happened to little Haleigh?

IMO

Janet


   

We don't know yet what type of sentence Tommy is gonna get for the drugs, let alone, if there is any involvement in HaLeigh's disappearance.   Even if he got 3 yrs.... at the end of that term and she is still married to him, guess where he would come to.  Not only that word has it that drugs can be gotten while in jail.  So... out he comes ..... her children have been free from the Croslin/Drug crap for 3 yrs... and in he walks. 

Not only that, his lying .... when will he lie again .... does she need this type of life ... do her children not deserve a descent drug free life ... I do think so.  Promises are just promises unless they are carried out.  Lindsy cannot wait until Tommy is out of jal to see if he has changed ..... why wait for the gamble .... divorce him and continue her life of freedom from all the gloom and doom that has been surrounding her and her children. 

GramaMonkey

Even if I give Lindsey the benefit of the doubt that she has seen the light and wants out ... that does not give her a free pass.  Where was her mindset on February 11, 2005 when Haleigh went missing.  It is so difficult to comprehend that Tommy is in the know regarding what happened that fateful night but his wife is in the dark.

In my opinion ... at the very least Lindsey has obstructed the justice process for over a year and ... according to the transcript has yet to reveal all to LE.

Janet

++++++


Nancy Grace - April 27, 2010

NANCY GRACE, HOST: ... Now you`re saying that your client knows what happened that night?

JIM WERTER, TOMMY CROSLIN'S ATTORNEY: Yes.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1004/27/ng.01.html

Name change per Janet

[Heart]

Considering that the truth encompassing those who participated in the happening and those who had knowledge regarding the night Haleigh Cummings went missing remains elusive ... I refuse to give Lindsey Croslin a pass.

It appears that possible repercussions which can affect Lindsey personally are beginning to surface and ... Lindsey is panicking.  In other words ... it is all about Lindsey ... not Haleigh.

Think about it.  A divorce can protect her financial stability considering her husband is facing over a $250,000 find but ... why is she concerned about losing her children if she had no part ... no knowledge ... in regards to what happened to little Haleigh?

IMO

Janet
   

“They’re gone for years,” said Lindsy Croslin, of possible sentences faced by her 18-year-old sister-in-law and others charged in the case. That includes her husband Hank Croslin Jr., Cummings’ cousin Hope A. Sykes and Misty Croslin’s friend Donna M. Brock.

“She’s going to lose her whole life over this,” Lindsy Croslin said of Misty.
http://www.crimeshots.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9940&page=6


In an exclusive interview, Lindsay Croslin said she was also baffled why husband Tommy, behind bars in St. John’s County Jail county charged with one count of drug trafficking, didn’t mention the polygraph to her when they spoke on Thursday. But she said she plans to ask him, and saw nothing suspicious or sinister in the omission.
Her husband’s polygraph was expected to also focus on the story his sister has been telling.
http://www.artharris.com/2010/04/09/...aph/#more-4105

[Tamikosmom]

SELF-EDIT - LAST POST
Chelsea has obstructed  s/b Lindsey has obstructed

[Heart]

floodofnoah
 
http://writeintoaction.com/5.01.10%20Minneapolis%20.pdf

[islandmonkey]

I enjoyed reading what you posted IM. 

Thanks NRCG~I have always been interested in this info. As I read more on different sites, I picked up that when someone states "they have no idea what happened" that is a lie because almost everyone has theories as to what may have happend and it is shown in Scott Peterson's stmt, Joran VDS  along with many others. Also for soem reason when someone uses "really"  and "you know" and "absolutely"  in there stmts it's pointing to lies......now I have the need to scour the stmts of the Satsuma group to see who used that type of verbage.

Snippets from the articles I've been reading:


Scott P

"I had absolutely nothing to do with her disappearance." The word "absolutely" is not necessary. "I had nothing to do with her disappearance" says the same thing. He uses word "absolutely" to try and convince us he is telling the truth.


January 16, 2003
Interview with Jodi Hernandez on NBC11

Hernandez: "So, you had nothing to do with this? I mean, people are having questions now."
Peterson: "The focus is on her. Let's keep her picture out there. Let's keep the tip
           line, the description out there."

"So, you had nothing to do with this" is more of a statement rather than a question. It would depend on the interviewer's voice inflection. The transcript ends it with a question mark. If it was a question, Peterson did not answer it. Even as a statement, Peterson avoids dealing with the issue of whether he is guilty by talking about Laci and not addressing if he had anything to do with it

January 29, 2003
Interview with Diane Sawyer on ABC's Good Morning America

A portion of his taped January 28 interview aired on the following day.

Sawyer:      "What kind of marriage was it?"
Peterson:    "God, the first word that comes to mind is, you know, glorious. I mean we took care
             of each other, very well. She was amazing. She is amazing."

Peterson uses the phrase "you know." We do not know something unless the person tells us it. People sometimes use this phrase expecting us to take for granted what they are saying. Other people just have a habit of saying this. Peterson uses this phrase a lot during his interviews. We would have to see if it is part of his normal speaking pattern.

The biggest blunder Peterson makes in this statement is that he speaks about his wife in the past tense. What this tells us is that Peterson knew his wife was dead at the time he gave this interview. He realizes what he has said so he corrects himself by referring to her in the present tense "she is amazing." We often see the same thing when a child disappears. Statistics say a family member is usually involved. Many of these cases are solved because a family member speaks about the missing kid in the past tense.

Gary Condit


Rep. Condit also begins his answer with the phrase "you know." This too is a sign that he wants us to take for granted that he and Chandra never had a cross word. The problem is we do not know.


Casey Anthony

"I have no clue where Caylee is."

"That I have no clue where my daughter is? Yes, that is the truth. That is the absolute truth."

Twice Casey said she had "no clue" where her daughter is. It is hard to believe a person when he or she says, "I have no clue" or "I have no idea." Most people have an idea on just about everything. I don't know how we can successfully send a man to Mars but I have an idea. My idea probably will not work because I am not a rocket scientist but I do have an idea. Casey also has to have an idea or clue as to where Caylee is. Doesn't she believe Caylee is with Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez? This is a strong indication she is withholding information.

I wasn’t sure what I would say about not knowing where Caylee was still hoping that
I would get a call or you know find out that Caylee was coming back so that I could go get her.

When people use the phrase "you know" they sometimes want us to take for granted what they are about to say. However, we take nothing for granted and only believe what they tell us. Some people have a habit of using this phrase but I did not hear Casey use this phrase often.

I had mentioned that when telling a story the person should be using past tense language. An exception to that rule is when talking about a missing person. Family members want to believe their missing loved one is alive and well. Therefore, they will always talk about them using present tense language. When a family member talks about the missing person using past tense language, they are revealing to us that they know the person is dead. Four times Casey refers to Caylee in the past tense. Many missing child cases are solved by listening to the verb tenses.  


Susan Smith

Susan Smith also used changing pronouns prior to her confession. On November 2, 1994, she made a public plea to the car-jacker/kidnapper. In part of her statement, she said,

I would like to say to whoever has my children, that they please, I mean please bring 'em home to us where they belong."   WOW~That sound familiar doesn't it

Smith referred to the kidnapper as "whoever" and "they." This does not make sense. If the last picture you had of your kids was the two of them being driven away by a male suspect, you would constantly refer to the kidnapper as "him" or "he" or "this man." This is how she described the kidnapper in her earlier statements. However, now she is telling us a different story. First she says, "Whoever has my children." By saying "whoever," she is acting like she has absolutely no idea who abducted her kids. However, she supposedly does know a little about the kidnapper because she was able to give a description of him. Even though she does not know the kidnapper's name, she should still refer to him as a male suspect. Secondly, she refers to the kidnapper as "they." Allegedly, one man abducted her kids. So where does the "they" come from? It comes from her deceptive mind. Because she is making up the story she cannot relate to it. She cannot see one man driving away with her kids because it never happened. Therefore, she slips up and uses the pronouns "whoever" and "they." As soon as I saw her make this plea on television I knew she was lying.

Michael Peterson


"No. Absolutely not. I'm not worried about what's going to happen because I know what happened and what did not happen, and I know it'll all work out."

Deceptive people try to convince you they are telling the truth. Often times they will do this by repeating their claim. Three times Peterson tells us he is not worried.    Again, this sounds very familiar in this case



Just a few tidbits from this link I am reading:

http://www.statementanalysis.com/cases/

[Tamikosmom]

floodofnoah
 
http://writeintoaction.com/5.01.10%20Minneapolis%20.pdf

Thanks Heart.

Does the originator this report have any credibility?

Janet

[islandmonkey]

floodofnoah
 
http://writeintoaction.com/5.01.10%20Minneapolis%20.pdf

Thanks Heart.

Does the originator this report have any credibility?

Janet

  Only if you consider a certified nut case credible.........read his BIO and let me know what you think:

http://writeintoaction.com/Sample%20The%20Dunking%20Tank.htm

[Tamikosmom]

floodofnoah
 
http://writeintoaction.com/5.01.10%20Minneapolis%20.pdf

Thanks Heart.

Does the originator this report have any credibility?

Janet

  Only if you consider a certified nut case credible.........read his BIO and let me know what you think:

http://writeintoaction.com/Sample%20The%20Dunking%20Tank.htm

OK

I found this paper dated . August 20, 2009.  Same author.

http://writeintoaction.com/08.20.09%20DCF%20Complaint.pdf

[no rose colored glasses]

floodofnoah
 
http://writeintoaction.com/5.01.10%20Minneapolis%20.pdf

He better watch himself, those are some damning allegations 

[islandmonkey]

 

Sorry for all the long stmt analysis post but this REALLY stood out


Q. "How many feet were you behind the car?"
A. "Maybe 30 to 40 feet."
Q. "In car lengths?"
A. "One"

When it comes to numbers, people who are being deceptive or do not know the specific number will often use the number "three."       When asked how far he was behind the car the first number that popped into his head was "30." He then added that he could have been up to "40 feet." When asked how far in car lengths, he responded "one." 30 to 40 feet is a pretty long car!

All this is from the link above

[no rose colored glasses]

IM all the info you have posted were all cases that I was very interested in  Things that I never would have picked up with some of the statements these people were making.

[islandmonkey]

floodofnoah
 
http://writeintoaction.com/5.01.10%20Minneapolis%20.pdf

Thanks Heart.

Does the originator this report have any credibility?

Janet

  Only if you consider a certified nut case credible.........read his BIO and let me know what you think:

http://writeintoaction.com/Sample%20The%20Dunking%20Tank.htm

OK

I found this paper dated . August 20, 2009.  Same author.

http://writeintoaction.com/08.20.09%20DCF%20Complaint.pdf

Same one, and anything from Flood of Noah is the same man......

[Tamikosmom]

floodofnoah
 
http://writeintoaction.com/5.01.10%20Minneapolis%20.pdf

Thanks Heart.

Does the originator this report have any credibility?

Janet

  Only if you consider a certified nut case credible.........read his BIO and let me know what you think:

http://writeintoaction.com/Sample%20The%20Dunking%20Tank.htm

The forum can all sigh at once ... Tamikosmom lacks the ability to articulate her thoughts.

 

Janet

[Heart]

floodofnoah
 
http://writeintoaction.com/5.01.10%20Minneapolis%20.pdf

Thanks Heart.

Does the originator this report have any credibility?

Janet

I believe that if he continues to bother the government as he portrays, they will eventually come and take him away in a straight jacket.

[islandmonkey]

IM all the info you have posted were all cases that I was very interested in  Things that I never would have picked up with some of the statements these people were making.

Thanks again NRCG

Me either, I only picked up the past tense usage and the repeating, remember when RC was tellin Geraldo I never hit my child, he repeated it......but mainly what always smacked me right in the eyes was his and Misty's use of past tense when talking about HaLeigh and the fact he seemed resigned to the fact that she was dead, when she could have wondered off

[Puzzler]

Quick, easy and not much thinking 

Joe seems to have one little pearl that we do not know about that saves his hiney from
going to jail at this time.

Something that excludes Croslin family word. Dunno what it is... but it seems to be
working for him up until this point, huh?

I will say this about Joe, if it turns out that he had anything to do with Haleigh, and what I mean is helping to dispose of her body, I will be shocked. I have believed from the start that Haleigh OD, and I lean more towards Misty giving her something so she would go to sleep, and she gave her too much. I know that I have read other theories that perhaps Haleigh wet the bed and Misty got mad and did something to her because of it, which is possible, but I just feel drugs were involved. And why I would be shocked if Joe helped, don't even ask, I don't know  Just feel that way.

Just a different thought here...does anyone think that during Misty's telling Ron that she couldn't babysit because she was too strung out and Ron saying yes you are going to babysit...that maybe Ron agreed to give Haleigh something that they both thought would just get Haleigh to go to sleep.  Not meaning any harm....but druggies (Misty, Ron) don't make the most common sense decisions.  Maybe they only wanted Haleigh to sleep...instead...it backfired and killed Haleigh.  That's about the only way I can think of that would have Misty and Ron covering for each other to this degree. 

[islandmonkey]

floodofnoah
 
http://writeintoaction.com/5.01.10%20Minneapolis%20.pdf

Thanks Heart.

Does the originator this report have any credibility?

Janet

  Only if you consider a certified nut case credible.........read his BIO and let me know what you think:

http://writeintoaction.com/Sample%20The%20Dunking%20Tank.htm

The forum can all sigh at once ... Tamikosmom lacks the ability to articulate her thoughts.

 

Janet

 

Those were exactly my feeling the first time I read it

[no rose colored glasses]

Quick, easy and not much thinking 

Joe seems to have one little pearl that we do not know about that saves his hiney from
going to jail at this time.

Something that excludes Croslin family word. Dunno what it is... but it seems to be
working for him up until this point, huh?

I will say this about Joe, if it turns out that he had anything to do with Haleigh, and what I mean is helping to dispose of her body, I will be shocked. I have believed from the start that Haleigh OD, and I lean more towards Misty giving her something so she would go to sleep, and she gave her too much. I know that I have read other theories that perhaps Haleigh wet the bed and Misty got mad and did something to her because of it, which is possible, but I just feel drugs were involved. And why I would be shocked if Joe helped, don't even ask, I don't know  Just feel that way.

Just a different thought here...does anyone think that during Misty's telling Ron that she couldn't babysit because she was too strung out and Ron saying yes you are going to babysit...that maybe Ron agreed to give Haleigh something that they both thought would just get Haleigh to go to sleep.  Not meaning any harm....but druggies (Misty, Ron) don't make the most common sense decisions.  Maybe they only wanted Haleigh to sleep...instead...it backfired and killed Haleigh.  That's about the only way I can think of that would have Misty and Ron covering for each other to this degree. 

Yes, I wouldn't doubt that for a minute. And perhaps they had done that several times in the past and nothing ever happened. Have to wonder if they did something like that to Jr also. Still seems strange that you can't hear Jr in the 911 calls. Most kids that age would be screaming and crying out of fear, that never sat right with me either.