2010.10.11 - JVM show discussing Haleigh case

[cyberborg]

FACT = Fingerprint scan was installed after Haleigh Cummings went Missing, not before. This is a Fact! However, I see it stated often that it was in place at the time that Haleigh went missing, This is not a FACT. MO is that Ronald Cummings is very much guilty of all that happened. MO is that he showed his guilt right from the very first hysterical crying, falling down, performance he gave. All My Opinion.

Yes ... we have a number of rumors, myths or, inconsistencies that tend to be floated as 'facts'.

They are cited so often that folks either are confused as to whether the stated 'fact' is true or not or, simply get tired of debunking so let it ride. This is not good for the forum and not good in solving the HaLeigh case. We should not let our passion or bias to want to present info to support our beliefs or desires get in the way of what are facts and what is opinion or optimistic desires.....

We need a 'Mythbusters' thread to reference that debunks these with reliable links, MSM not media that mis-reports. Also ... consider the source ... a statement from a Defense attorney is not necessarily a true 'fact'.

 

[mck16]

Yes ... we have a number of rumors, myths or, inconsistencies that tend to be floated as 'facts'.

They are cited so often that folks either are confused as to whether the stated 'fact' is true or not or, simply get tired of debunking so let it ride. This is not good for the forum and not good in solving the HaLeigh case. We should not let our passion or bias to want to present info to support our beliefs or desires get in the way of what are facts and what is opinion or optimistic desires.....

We need a 'Mythbusters' thread to reference that debunks these with reliable links, MSM not media that mis-reports. Also ... consider the source ... a statement from a Defense attorney is not necessarily a true 'fact'.

This is a great post cyberborg!!!! Everytime I see something posted as "Fact" and then followed by IMO. I want to just flail especially if it is a post from someone who has not been on this forum for a very long time. There has been so much posted since the first day of this horrible crime and there is no way a person that hasn't been on the forum since the beginning can go back and read all the posts. That is why they read something that is just a rumor or opinion and it is posted over and over and soon people believe it is a fact.

When the truth is there is very little if any Facts in this whole mystery. I still read things on various threads that I know are just not true but frankly it is too hard to point this out to some of the posters. There are so many opinionated people here and I envy them that they can be so sure of their theories. I have not been convinced of anything and certainly not that it is due to one family or the other. On the other hand there have been valid questions asked and valid discrepancies pointed out, but I am sure these are all quite evident to LE and have been followed up on. and this is JMO

 

[Lanie]

Yes ... we have a number of rumors, myths or, inconsistencies that tend to be floated as 'facts'.

They are cited so often that folks either are confused as to whether the stated 'fact' is true or not or, simply get tired of debunking so let it ride. This is not good for the forum and not good in solving the HaLeigh case. We should not let our passion or bias to want to present info to support our beliefs or desires get in the way of what are facts and what is opinion or optimistic desires.....

We need a 'Mythbusters' thread to reference that debunks these with reliable links, MSM not media that mis-reports. Also ... consider the source ... a statement from a Defense attorney is not necessarily a true 'fact'.

I couldn't agree more. It's very frustrating trying to work out a theory on some 'fact' floating around in here only to find out the only source is AH, NG, and/or JVM.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

BBM - Somewhere deep within these threads are comments from other posters (from the Satsuma area) that have stated PDM did not install the timeclocks with fingerprint identification until AFTER Haleigh disappeared so that theory does not hold water IMO. Must have been an important reason for that major change to company policy, don't ya think?

I have seen locals say many things on a particular case that did not turnout to be true in the end.

So until LE comes out or the executives of PDM makes such statement I have no way of knowing that it is indeed a fact or not.

Also until LE comes out and says RC wasnt at work that night I will continue to believe he was.

Can you point me to the supposed facts you say exist? I thought the moderators have said unless something is proven as a fact it is considered a rumor and boy howdy have we had a lot of those.

IMO

 

[Baznme]

I have seen locals say many things on a particular case that did not turnout to be true in the end.

So until LE comes out or the executives of PDM makes such statement I have no way of knowing that it is indeed a fact or not.

Also until LE comes out and says RC wasnt at work that night I will continue to believe he was.

Can you point me to the supposed facts you say exist? I thought the moderators have said unless something is proven as a fact it is considered a rumor and boy howdy have we had a lot of those.

IMO

Where in my post did I say there was any "supposed fact" that I said existed? Can you point that out to me?

All I did was point out there are conflicting opinions and why when it comes to your belief that RC was at work that night. I am not here to argue but rather to try to put 2 and 2 together on this little girl's behalf since no one else seems to be able to, (LE).

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Where in my post did I say there was any "supposed fact" that I said existed? Can you point that out to me?

All I did was point out there are conflicting opinions and why when it comes to your belief that RC was at work that night. I am not here to argue but rather to try to put 2 and 2 together on this little girl's behalf since no one else seems to be able to, (LE).

Because you said "we have learned."

1) we "have learned" there is a hole in the fence there @ PDM,
2) we "have learned" that it is possible that the children have slept in his vehicle while he was working there,
3) we "have Learned" that a time keeper could be bribed or coerced to clock a person in or out (anyways that was possible to do 18 months ago)

How can someone "learn" anything if they are not basing it on facts?

Learning is acquiring new knowledge based on something factual.

IMO

 

[Baznme]

Because you said "we have learned."

1) we "have learned" there is a hole in the fence there @ PDM,
2) we "have learned" that it is possible that the children have slept in his vehicle while he was working there,
3) we "have Learned" that a time keeper could be bribed or coerced to clock a person in or out (anyways that was possible to do 18 months ago)

How can someone "learn" anything if they are not basing it on facts?

Learning is acquiring new knowledge based on something factual.

IMO

I didn't say any of those things. You quoted someone else's post, not mine.