1161 users online (158 members and 1003 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 147
  1. #46
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    6,532
    Quote Originally Posted by Nonni Brenda View Post
    BBM
    Hi K, I agree. If Misty was treated unfairly concerning the drug arrest and charges, then fair is fair. I really don't want to see Misty freed, because she knows more that she is telling about Haleigh. It is so hard for me to seperate these 2 issues.
    I think it is just human nature to have difficulty separating the drug case from the Haleigh case. If all we knew of Misty was that she is a drug trafficker, it might be easier to disagree with her harsh sentence. But reality is that by the time we found out about Misty's criminal activities, we knew her to be the key in a missing child case--a key player who appeared to be holding back information that might have helped the Haleigh investigation, as well as a person who flitted around living her life while little Haleigh was no more than a very distant memory for her. It is indeed difficult to root for Misty under these circumstances.

    However, those involved from a legal standpoint, i.e., the courts, prosecutors and LE, have an obligation to step back and look at the issues separately, and I am not sure they have done that.

    As much as I want the perp(s) in prison for Haleigh, I need to see evidence that warrants it first. I do not necessarily mean enough evidence for a conviction, but evidence of some kind that says Misty is probably guilty, combined with the drug charges, would make me feel just fine about Misty's harsh sentence. But for the drug charge alone, 25 years is ridiculous, IMO.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    North Ga.
    Posts
    2,070
    Quote Originally Posted by krkrjx View Post
    I think it is just human nature to have difficulty separating the drug case from the Haleigh case. If all we knew of Misty was that she is a drug trafficker, it might be easier to disagree with her harsh sentence. But reality is that by the time we found out about Misty's criminal activities, we knew her to be the key in a missing child case--a key player who appeared to be holding back information that might have helped the Haleigh investigation, as well as a person who flitted around living her life while little Haleigh was no more than a very distant memory for her. It is indeed difficult to root for Misty under these circumstances.

    However, those involved from a legal standpoint, i.e., the courts, prosecutors and LE, have an obligation to step back and look at the issues separately, and I am not sure they have done that.

    As much as I want the perp(s) in prison for Haleigh, I need to see evidence that warrants it first. I do not necessarily mean enough evidence for a conviction, but evidence of some kind that says Misty is probably guilty, combined with the drug charges, would make me feel just fine about Misty's harsh sentence. But for the drug charge alone, 25 years is ridiculous, IMO.
    I agree totally with you. Just wish she had stepped up in the beginning, even now, but she still isn't, as far as we know. Never the less, `1st offense, barely 18 yrs. old, 25 yrs...other sentences to follow.....
    I love a Williams Syndrome kid.

  3. #48
    Emma Peel's Avatar
    Emma Peel is offline Keep your bowler hat on in times of trouble, & beware of diabolical masterminds.
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    wherever they send me
    Posts
    9,892
    I've been wondering, if it's ACLU driven, if it could also be about the amount of her bail? It was WAAAAAAAAY up there. As was Ron's, IIRC...

    from wiki - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighth_...s_Constitution

    The Eighth Amendment (Amendment VIII) to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights which prohibits the federal government from imposing excessive bail, excessive fines or cruel and unusual punishments. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that this amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause applies to the states. The phrases employed originated in the English Bill of Rights of 1689.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    6,532
    Quote Originally Posted by Emma Peel View Post
    I've been wondering, if it's ACLU driven, if it could also be about the amount of her bail? It was WAAAAAAAAY up there. As was Ron's, IIRC...
    It could very well be about Misty's astronomically high bail. We have seen high bail amounts for others recently, but prior to the players' arrests and even for some time after, others were being assessed reasonable bail amounts.

    It makes one wonder why this filing didn't happen early on, though. I mean, if this is the issue, and should it be the opinion of the Supreme Court that Misty's rights were violated by excessive bail, what remedy could be ordered now?

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, LA
    Posts
    31,655
    I could certainly be wrong, but I don't think the ACLU is involved because, typically, the ACLU takes on cases that set precedent on issues impacting large groups of individuals. Misty's case doesn't seem to fit that bill. OTOH, if the ACLU has joined the fight to reform drug laws in Florida, then *maybe*. But still, it seems they would become involved in the appeal. There's not much of an issue at stake before an accused is sentenced, especially when she has submitted a plea of nolo contendere and refused to seek other remedies, foremost a trial. JMO

    As for the question of high bail, what's the point two days before sentencing?

    Regardless of who assisted Misty in filing the petition, at this point, I think she had second thoughts about withdrawing her not guilty plea, and the habeas petition was a last ditch effort to delay sentencing.
    PODCAST ROW

    WEBSLEUTHS ON FACEBOOK
    __________________________________
    Always give generously of yourself to support your beliefs. And when you're knocked down, give more.




  6. #51
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Midwest now OC forever
    Posts
    798
    Quote Originally Posted by Emma Peel View Post
    I've been wondering, if it's ACLU driven, if it could also be about the amount of her bail? It was WAAAAAAAAY up there. As was Ron's, IIRC...
    Bail does not make sense now. She's in prison and cannot get out.

    I vaguely remember from school something about two people who commit the same crime cannot be charged differently and/or receive different sentences. There are exceptions but in this case, I cannot see anything that would fall under an exception.

    I'm thinking maybe they filed as cruel and unusual punishment that Misty received a harsher penalty than Donna when without Donna, Misty could not have committed that particular crime. Donna could have committed the crime without Misty as Donna is the one who secured the pain medication and Donna was the one who received the money. Donna was allowed to plea to a lessor charge without any action on her part. Misty was not given the same deal.

    That also may apply to the Putnam charges as well. We won't know for sure until sentencing. However, it looks like everyone...Hope, Tommy and Ron were all allowed to plea to lessor charges while Misty was not.

    That is the only thing I can think of that might fall under the cruel and unusual punishment.
    This is my perspective and understanding of the situation based on the current information that I know......the final answer to the equation is the only question we are all asking ...the unknown pieces to the puzzle!!!

  7. #52
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    6,532
    Quote Originally Posted by 1Chump View Post
    Bail does not make sense now. She's in prison and cannot get out.

    I vaguely remember from school something about two people who commit the same crime cannot be charged differently and/or receive different sentences. There are exceptions but in this case, I cannot see anything that would fall under an exception.

    I'm thinking maybe they filed as cruel and unusual punishment that Misty received a harsher penalty than Donna when without Donna, Misty could not have committed that particular crime. Donna could have committed the crime without Misty as Donna is the one who secured the pain medication and Donna was the one who received the money. Donna was allowed to plea to a lessor charge without any action on her part. Misty was not given the same deal.

    That also may apply to the Putnam charges as well. We won't know for sure until sentencing. However, it looks like everyone...Hope, Tommy and Ron were all allowed to plea to lessor charges while Misty was not.

    That is the only thing I can think of that might fall under the cruel and unusual punishment.
    Hi Chump, I agree it probably cannot be about bail at this stage. It does have to do with constitutional rights, no doubt. And no doubt Misty feels many of her rights were violated; prisoners typically do.

    As for a plea deal, the only one of the players allowed to plead to a lesser charge is Donna. Ron's deal got two of his charges dropped but it also required he plead GUILTY to the remaining three charges, and none of his remaining three charges were reduced.

    Tommy had one charged either reduced or dropped but he saw no reduction to his trafficking charge. Hope was offered nothing in return for her plea; she pled as charged.

    All had initially pleaded Not Guilty except Hope. She pleaded Nolo right away (and I still cannot figure out why). Everyone haggled with the state except for Hope. But the only ones to get any kind of deal were Ron and Donna.

    Now, with that said, I agree 100% with you about the different treatment for Donna and Misty. They committed the crime together. In court, Donna stated that she gave pills to Misty "and those were the pills that Misty sold." Misty set up and did the deal, but Donna was Misty's supplier in that transaction. Both were equally charged. But in the end Misty's charge stood, while Donna's charge was reduced.

    Donna was given leniency in exchange for her Nolo plea; Misty was not treated the same way, even though both were equally involved in the crime. In cases like this, one defendant is often given a deal to testify against the other to ensure a conviction. Usually it is the lesser-involved party that is offered the deal. Donna did go into court and claim Misty sold the pills. However, she also admitted she had supplied Misty with said pills.

    Considering the testimony of one was not necessary to convict the other in this case, the state allowing Donna to plead to a lesser charge while not allowing Misty the same consideration is biased and unfair. And it may be viewed by a higher court as discrimination.

    I think you are on to something, Chump!

  8. #53
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by 1Chump View Post
    Bail does not make sense now. She's in prison and cannot get out.

    I vaguely remember from school something about two people who commit the same crime cannot be charged differently and/or receive different sentences. There are exceptions but in this case, I cannot see anything that would fall under an exception.

    I'm thinking maybe they filed as cruel and unusual punishment that Misty received a harsher penalty than Donna when without Donna, Misty could not have committed that particular crime. Donna could have committed the crime without Misty as Donna is the one who secured the pain medication and Donna was the one who received the money. Donna was allowed to plea to a lessor charge without any action on her part. Misty was not given the same deal.

    That also may apply to the Putnam charges as well. We won't know for sure until sentencing. However, it looks like everyone...Hope, Tommy and Ron were all allowed to plea to lessor charges while Misty was not.

    That is the only thing I can think of that might fall under the cruel and unusual punishment.
    BBM This is not true. In my state, MN, with felony charges a person's sentence depends on their criminal history - same conviction can result in one person getting probation and the other getting an executed sentence, again depending on their criminal history.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, LA
    Posts
    31,655
    Quote Originally Posted by Owlface View Post
    BBM This is not true. In my state, MN, with felony charges a person's sentence depends on their criminal history - same conviction can result in one person getting probation and the other getting an executed sentence, again depending on their criminal history.
    That's the norm throughout the country, Owlface, because trial courts use sentencing guidelines and scoresheets to determine a defendant's sentence. The punishment for like crimes can span vast ranges. Depending on their scores, one defendant might be sentenced at the very low end of the range while the other receives the maximum punishment allowed for the same crime.
    Last edited by bessie; 11-24-2010 at 11:40 AM.
    PODCAST ROW

    WEBSLEUTHS ON FACEBOOK
    __________________________________
    Always give generously of yourself to support your beliefs. And when you're knocked down, give more.




  10. #55
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    5,526
    Looks as if Misty has filed for an APPEAL in St.John's as well. Maybe that is why they are asking for a reduced bail? I now wonder if she will she be able to get out of all her charges due to her age when the sting started, the amount of bond placed on her, what ever else may of happen in jail that we don't know about, or any mistake LE made.

    "Snip" http://doris.clk.co.st-johns.fl.us/B...Details/192668

    Judge: BERGER, WENDY W Case Type: Criminal Felony
    Case Number: 10000141CFMA Status: CLOSED
    Clerk File Date: 1/21/2010 Status Date: 10/8/2010
    SAO Case Number: Total Fees Due: 525518.00
    Agency: FDLE
    Custody Location: DEPT OF CORRECTIONS
    Agency Report #: ST730308 #62



    Parties
    Type Party Name Attorney
    DEFENDANT CROSLIN, MISTY JANETTE
    FIELDS, ROBERT M (Main Attorney)
    PLAINTIFF STATE OF FLORIDA ROYS, JACQUELYN (Main Attorney)


    Charges
    Count Description Level Degree Plea Disposition Disposition Date
    1 TRAFFICKING IN OXYCODONE (28 G - 30 KG) (893.135 1c1c) F F ADJUDICATED GUILTY 10/08/2010


    Case Dockets

    Date Entry
    12/2/2010 RECORD ON APPEAL (VOLUME I) (5D10-3883)
    12/2/2010 LETTER TO 5TH DCA - RECORD ON APPEAL (1 VOLUME) (5D10-3883)
    11/29/2010 PROCEEDINGS BEFORE JUDGE BERGER ON 10/08/2010
    11/15/2010 5TH DCA ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF NEW CASE (5D10-3883)
    11/8/2010 LETTER TO 5TH DCA - NOTICE OF APPEAL



    Habeas Corpus http://www.lectlaw.com/def/h001.htm


  11. #56
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    5,526
    Does this mean that Misty's appeal was granted and if so what does the Due Date of 2-2-11 stand for? Does this mean she will be out of jail? I am so confused because she appealed in PC as well and her docket was updated today, not sure what it means though. In PC it just states 01/19/2011 69 COMMITMENT ISSUED

    01/19/2011 70 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AS TO JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE.


    Update for Misty's Case in St.John's Co.
    Anyone know what this means?
    (1/4/2011 5TH DCA ORDER - MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD ON APPEAL FILED 12-29-10 IS GRANTED(DUE 2-2-11)
    1/3/2011 MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD ON APPEAL)


    10000141CFMA
    STATE OF FLORIDA vs. CROSLIN, MISTY JANETTE

    "Snip" http://doris.clk.co.st-johns.fl.us/c...Details/192668

    Summary
    Judge: BERGER, WENDY W
    Case Type: Criminal Felony Status: CLOSED
    Case Number: 10000141CFMA

  12. #57
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    6,532
    Quote Originally Posted by MADJGNLAW View Post
    Does this mean that Misty's appeal was granted and if so what does the Due Date of 2-2-11 stand for? Does this mean she will be out of jail? I am so confused because she appealed in PC as well and her docket was updated today, not sure what it means though. In PC it just states 01/19/2011 69 COMMITMENT ISSUED

    01/19/2011 70 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AS TO JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE.


    Update for Misty's Case in St.John's Co.
    Anyone know what this means?
    (1/4/2011 5TH DCA ORDER - MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD ON APPEAL FILED 12-29-10 IS GRANTED(DUE 2-2-11)
    1/3/2011 MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD ON APPEAL)
    It means a motion was granted. They motioned for permission to include more information in the appeal filed previously, and the court granted that motion to include more information. 2/2/2011 is the date the new information has to be received by the appeals court.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    5,011
    New entry on docket.
    I have no idea what it means but MOTION TO GRANT RELIEF DUE TO DEFAULT sounds promising.

    01/21/2011
    MOTION-OTHER SUBSTANTIVE
    Jack White BY: Jack White
    FILED AS "MOTION TO GRANT RELIEF DUE TO DEFAULT"


    http://jweb.flcourts.org/pls/docket/ds_docket_search%20

    case # is 2010-1989
    "IT TAKES A LOT BIGGER MAN TO STAND UP AND ADMIT HIS MISTAKES THAN TO HIDE BEHIND A LIE"
    WHY WON'T ANYONE STAND UP FOR HALEIGH??!! WHY?? TELL THE TRUTH!!
    HALEIGH DESERVES IT!!

  14. #59
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    6,532
    Quote Originally Posted by twall View Post
    New entry on docket.
    I have no idea what it means but MOTION TO GRANT RELIEF DUE TO DEFAULT sounds promising.

    01/21/2011
    MOTION-OTHER SUBSTANTIVE
    Jack White BY: Jack White
    FILED AS "MOTION TO GRANT RELIEF DUE TO DEFAULT"


    http://jweb.flcourts.org/pls/docket/ds_docket_search%20

    case # is 2010-1989
    Wow.

    I wonder if the lower court was supposed to respond by a certain date and did not do it, or didn't do it on time. Or...Jack White thinks they didn't. Just guessing, as usual.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    6,532

    Misty's Supreme Court Appeal Denied

    Misty's SC appeal was denied as unauthorized on 3/8/2011. This could mean she didn't request Jack White to file it, or it could mean Jack White otherwise did not have authority to file. JMO.

Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 84
    Last Post: 04-01-2010, 03:11 PM