Poor Babies, things are going to get better, as we learn to snuff out these predators of our children, hunting them down like the prey they did with the Babes.

I’m sorry,HGm, I will have to agree to disagree with you on this whole “drug test the parents of missing kids first” idea.

As beat up as I get for supposedly dissing cops I KNOW they would be all over that - with just one look at a parent. If there is even a chance that drugs or liquor or gambling or anything else is present they will find it out without the need for any drug test (they can tell from looking at someone, their home, car, friends, associates, etc).
I just can’t bring myself to say yeah drug test the parent of every missing kid. First it’s not necessary, won’t help anything, and my God, the pain it would add to already agonized people. Time, money and effort would be better spent elsewhere IMO.
Please look at the Shanyia story. LE found out VERY fast exactly what had happened and why.
Drug testing that obvious druggie “mother” would have been completely unnecessary and unhelpful. LE knew already!

Did any one else notice his mug shot? He is wearing the same shirt in all of them. Maybe he quit bathing? ewww.
++++++++

tobias,

I thought the same thing so I did a little digging. It is the jail uniform. Look at the pictures of Tommy in shackles being walked in to questioning when he was locked up. It is actually a one piece blue jumpsuit.

The women get a blue jumpsuit also.

I guess it does sound sort of paranoid I guess. Maybe I watch too mcu Discovery Health, Mystery Diagnosis, CSI, Bones, and other forensic TV, LOL Then again I might be onto something.

looks like the Jr Croslin posted bail about 15 minues ago, hope they all have a wonderful weekend together

Tobia
You make a very good point. That question really needs to be asked. Why are these women who stand against the Croslins or Snodgrass suddenly being struck down by seizures? Maybe we should some research on posionings that result in seizures. Maybe the seperate Drs haven’t made the conncetion between these two women and thier place within this case.
OMW! I just had a thought race into my head. Could this be a way for Tommy & family to “steal” Lindsey’s children from her? Does she know too much and want to come forward? Could it have been done because they suspect as much? I am now concerned for hersafety as well as others.

As far as the LE I had been thinking maybe a neighbor had called but I did not read the full arrest report.

I too am wondering now where Lindsey was at that time of the morning. It doesn’t seem that she was delivering kids to school.

Oceanviewnan, all very good points, including the further imput about the suspect possibly having inside information about Haleigh’s medical condition.

Polly Thank you for that list. All too true!

Of course, with Haleigh having asthma, maybe pets were not recommended in the house anyway, still, that’s another point in favor of someone knowing things about the family an average scum bag lurking in the woods would not know.

I too see the value of Tobia’s post. I had not yet thought about how that “insider information” could have come into play or the fact that it HAD to be someone who was SURE they did not have one. Does anyone know if the rental manager/property owner forbids pets/dogs? Would that be common knowledge or just a general suppostion due to the fact that more than 80% of landlords forbid them? Fantastic question though!

I too feel like I am learning and growing daily through this site and outlet for expresion. Jan and Simon thank you, truely!

In response to you post on November 20th, 2009 at 2:23 pm.

I agree that what m2c said is important. We all, as caring, responsible citizens (if we truely are) we need to address those issues and do EVERYTHING we can to help those children in need. Even if it’s just “hashing” these solutions out on a comment board. I appreciate the opportunity to LEARN about the issues and how they affect these children, GROW in my thinking and knowledge of such subjects, and potentially HELP make a change for the better.

I learn something new about observing and sleuthing every day from people who have been posting diligently about this case from the beginning.

I am reposting, in quotes, your response to my post only so that readers are clear on what I am answering. My responses will be in braces underneath your statements/questions.

m2c♥ said,in November 20th, 2009 at 1:41 pm Hollys Gmom: I know what you’re trying to get at but I don’t think a drug test is going to get the answers.

Even if a parent is a druggie, a test is not going to tell LE if they owe money. The druggie would have to tell them that. Same with whether it was possible a dealer did it for revenge. And what if the parents gambled or lost money in stocks? A drug test isn’t going to help there although the motive would be the same.
(True to first point. If might give an indication in that direction though. 2nd point, same answer. 3rd point, That too should be investigated as well as being a very viable reason that needs to be checked out. 4th point true but would also need to be checked into.)

Believe me, when a child goes missing LE looks very hard into all of that - the circumstances of the parents and relatives, friends, neighbors, etc. ( I am thankfull that they do.)

A drug test isn’t going to prove anything other than maybe the parent was doped up at the time the child went missing (if they even know exactly what time).
(1st point, wouldn’t you consider that to be important information if not to the investigation then in returing the child to the same household? 2nd point, even if they don’t know down to the minute when the child went missing they absolutely should know the DAY they went missing.)

And even drug addicts can love their kids. A drug test is not going to prove or disprove a parent’s willingness to cooperate with the investigation. There are plenty of families with no addictions, rich and poor who have something to hide that could hinder the investigation. Hence, usually LE asks for an LDT. That’s all that’s needed IMO. LE will find out the rest without having to do drug tests which in my mind don’t prove anything other than that parent is currently under the influence.
(1st point, I know that to be true. I do know some addicts who do offer thier children more than the basic necessities of life as well as love. 2nd point, What if the test was relieable proof they had lied to LE? Wouldn’t that also prove they would be likely to withhold other information in order to protect themselves? 3rd point, I totally agee with that statement. I’m not sure what means could help in those situations but I THINK that the manditory drug testing in missing children investigations would cover a high % of cases.
4th point, I realize that the LDT is a usefull tool for LE but it is not 100% accurate. Why not give them both? Maybe both test together would cover that 100%? 5th point, Don’t you think that whether or not a parent is currently “high” or had used drugs within 48 hrs of the disappearance be important information?)

m2c, I also wanted to say that I appreciate your responses. They are not only informative but help me to clarifiy, if only to myself why I think certain subjects are relevant or important. Thank you for offering me an opportunity to discuss and maybe even clarify my meanings.

i really appreciate your stating how some have circumstance that are more challenging to bring children up in. we need to figure out ways to make all children less vulnerable.

ShambySay, boy i am really hoping things turn out right for cobra.

m2c♥ said,in November 20th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
of course it could be several types of people if it was a kidnapping.
-someone brkg in and haleigh saw them - covr-up
-woman or man wanting to parent a beautiful little girl
-pedophile
-retaliation towards parent(s)
-other parent - inthiscase no crystal does not have her with herself
-other parent, willing to hide child
-in this case someone trying to help crystal out
-someone thinking they are rescuing haleigh
-someone to sell child for adoption or other purposes

So, COBRA, I have a job for you. Investigate who and when that red truck was sold to. Find out if police have investigated it, and please report your findings.

Hollys Gmom said,in November 20th, 2009 at 1:03 pm — that is interesting, to see a profile. i am not following what happened to somer.

tobias, i was so sorry ron felt he had to get married. if he married misty to keep her close, i can not imagine, what that would be like.

tobias, no sexual abuse has not been proven. just considering what the possibilities are.

the possibilities can make your head swim.

Even if a parent is a druggie, a test is not going to tell LE if they owe money. The druggie would have to tell them that. Same with whether it was possible a dealer did it for revenge. And what if the parents gambled or lost money in stocks? A drug test isn’t going to help there although the motive would be the same.

Believe me, when a child goes missing LE looks very hard into all of that - the circumstances of the parents and relatives, friends, neighbors, etc.

A drug test isn’t going to prove anything other than maybe the parent was doped up at the time the child went missing (if they even know exactly what time).

And even drug addicts can love their kids. A drug test is not going to prove or disprove a parent’s willingness to cooperate with the investigation. There are plenty of families with no addictions, rich and poor who have something to hide that could hinder the investigation. Hence, usually LE asks for an LDT. That’s all that’s needed IMO. LE will find out the rest without having to do drug tests which in my mind don’t prove anything other than that parent is currently under the influence.

Also, some churches/ministers insist on weeks or more of “counseling” with the future bride and groom to be sure they know what they’re doing! (I did not word that the way the church would but the church’s intent is to help people understand and take their vows seriously).

And the other topic you all have been talking about - there are LOTS of reasons for kidnapping. Some who take babies are women who could not have any, or go-betweens who sell a baby to a truly good home under false pretences. But there is a category/kind of kidnapping that is for the purpose of sex - boys, girls of all ages for those evil sickos.

To me all children need protection from all kinds of crimes and all kinds of kidnappings.
Unfortunately - as with so many other things - the children of poor people are often the most vulnerable. For example a single parent who has to work or both parents who have low paying jobs and both work, a family who lives in a bad neighborhood because they can’t afford better, etc. But certainly the children of alcoholics and drug addicts are surely more vulnerable. Now whether that also means that those kids are more likely to be SOLD, I don’t know. It’s possible. It’s also possible that a “friend” or neighbor could set up a sale of a vulnerable child. Doesn’t have to be the parents.

Yes, on both of the items you mentioned as well as:
1)Rule out the possibility it was done for monies owed

2) Rule out the possibility it was done for revenge by drug dealer ect.

3) To immediatley let the LE and CPS know that they were acting in a diminished capacity

4) To immediately let LE know they TRUELY have nothing to hide and are not leaving out crutial information because they are afraid they might incrimminate themselves. At a time like that thier usage and habits are secondary to the welfare of the child BUT necessary information to LE in thier investigation.

5) To have verifieable proof of usage IF there is or has been an investigation of parents by DCF/CPS. If they are secretly using, even though being tested weekly, those departments need to know, the sooner the better.

6) To assess, on the spot, the parents honest willingness to aid the investigation. Think like this: A child goes missing, the parent used or uses drugs of any kind at the time of the disappearance or within days prior but are willing to submit a sample and own up to thier usage, would signal that they were being 100% truthfull and most likely NOT the prime suspect.

Those reasons plus possibly more.

One reason I thought of is to show that kids of druggies are even MORE vulnerable to such crimes. Is that along the lines you are thinking of? And/or maybe that a druggie would be more inclined to sell their child for drugs or something?

I do agree that the preacher and church did not approve of the wedding but it may have just as much to do with:

1) Misty’s age
2) Ron’s reasons for marring her
a)To keep her close by
b)Possibly doing so only to avoid being charged with stat rape.

I agree with what you are saying. I think the answer lies in that family’s denial. Denial that Joe or Tommy actually commited such crimes, denial that what they did was really a crime. The denial in part due to thier own shame at having a SO as a family member. They minimized it in thier minds or disavoided it completely. It happens, and probably more often then we would like to admit.

I’m going to work on that list of endangered/kidanpped/murderer children who have substanitated account that thier parents used drugs.

PS I think it is very important to know not only IF they use, but what they use, and whether they were “high” or not at the time of the disappearance/murder. For this to be done accurately they would have to test the parents within a 48 hour window for urine tests.

Got to get the house and yard ready for company next week.

I’ll check in this evening.

Bye y’all!

- Leaving the area unexpectedly, even if it seems that they have a good reason
(He was trying to move to another state recently)

- Missing work or other routine engagements particularly on the afternoon or night of the incident
( He didn’t miss work that night as he was not working at that time)

- Unexplained injuries such as cuts, bruises, particularly on the head, arms and hands
(Answers as of yet unknown to me, but surely known to LE)

- An unnatural interest in the Haleigh Cummings investigation and paying close attention to the media
(Not sure how to answer this one since his sister is the last person to have seen Haleigh. However, he did place himself at the scene of the crime)

- Talking about this incident with others
(Same as above)

- An increase in nervousness or irritability
(This would be a big yes to me. The domestic violence and increased drug use is an indication)

- The sudden shaving of facial hair or head hair or the growing of a mustache or beard
(No changes noticed on this one)

- No longer operating their work vehicle for any reason, including reporting it stolen, giving it away or hiding it in a garage
(Big red flag- Red truck that was sold even though it was registered to someone else!)

- A change in the use of alcohol or cigarettes usage, either increase or decrease
(Huge, drastic increase on all listed substances. I can’t say cigarettes with 100% certainty, but almost every video of the Croslins show Misty and others puffing away.)

Do you all think that this is a close enough match for him to be considered THE prime suspect?

chelsea was outraged at the suggestion that she would let a sex offender near her children. that was on a.h. site. she did interview with art. something about cobra asking about a sapp(?) sex offender. but, i was thinking about misty’s accusations of cousin joe. chelsea let joe stay at her house. i think we all have different ideas what sex abuse or molestation is. i did not know if misty’s family did not believe misty.
or maybe they thought it was kid stuff and not important. and supposedly ron, let joe come around too. i find that confusing to figure if misty is telling the truth. do they not believe her?

i realize misty could have just been diversionary. and she could have just been plain lying.

then above some said maybe joe or tommy came in for the gun. some darn gun keeps coming up. so maybe haleigh woke up and saw something.

Do you promise to follow through? You have my word that I’ll help you anyway I can. This will be so exciting and wonderful for you. I’m already fired up!

I wanted to also offer the suggestion of JobCorp for Misty. Many disadvantaged youth have been able to learn a trade through that program while recieving: free room and board, free meals, free education & earn money for personal needs.

The only thing Misty wouldn’t like is JobCorp doesn’t allow cell phones.

Misty should consider JobCorp. Many disadvantaged young adults have been able to learn valueable trades through this program while being given: free housing, free meals, free education, and paid money to buy personal nessecary items and such. There are also a wide range of choice as to what trade one would like to earn.

That she was trying to latch onto Ron through his kids?

That she just wanted a family?

bond set for Tommy

i sometimes wonder if misty really did threaten amber, to take her baby from her and her man? ron did end up going to take the baby for a night according to mary. i think that is because of misty. could all of that atmosphere and games have contributed to whatever happened to haleigh. and a grown woman (amber’s mom) getting in a physical fight with misty over all of this.

also, misty seemed like maybe she was being very territorial. something about the kids liking her more than their own mother. could this have played a part in any way?

m2c, i did hope that the donna thing would have turned out differently. i was hoping the “side effect” was that something good would come out of it for misty. you know, seeing constructive opportunity for herself.
but, the road rage thing, that was ridiculous.
i guess i have to say i was wrong about how that all turned out.

m2c, you are right and I wonder about what might have happened if that opportunity for help had been legitimate.

Polly and Tobias, you guys make so much sense. I think for anyone on govt assistance they should have to pass random drug testing and if they fail no benefits, unfortunately, this will only ultimately hurt the children in the home since we don’t have nearly enough foster case facilities to care for tlal the children that would be displaced.

I have to wonder about the assemblage of persons in Tommy’s home right now, seems to me that with Nay Nay, Misty, Tommy, Lisa, and Hank all being there tmost of the people that are highly suspect in Haleigh’s disappearance are all under one roof, what do they say? Birds of a feather flock together, is Haleigh’s disappearance the one thing that binds them all together? It’s almost like they are huddling together for protection.

But you know what? The law doesn’t even remove kids from homes where they’ve been beaten, burned, scalded, etc. The courts put them right back there. If we can’t get the law to see how wrong that is, I don’t know how to help kids with druggie parents. To me, if a parent hurts a child like that it should be the very last time that parent sees all of his/her children and the parent should have an operation to permanently prevent having any more children (fat chance for the last one but slight chance for the first?)
I don’t understand our “justice system” at all. Kids apparently have NO rights and NO protection especially from their own parents.

I’ll help you anyway I can. Just ask!

I understand what you all are saying about Misty should be able to do this herself now and I agree. But I just wonder if that offer of friendship and support had been genuine if Misty might have really given it a shot. I’m truly sorry that it was not a genuine opportunity for her but rather another kick in the teeth. (Again, let me say that I am not trying to be part of a pity-party. Just wondering).

My husband is a poor reader, but I told him it takes practice and to read everthing he can get his hands on. He’s improving and he’s starting to even like it.

I would have never known you think your grammar is poor.

To all:

We need to start pressuring law-makers to deal out stiffer punishments for parents abusing drugs, do drugs and lose your kids, first offense - no second chance.