Ron Cummings Arrested 2009.08.06 RE: Battery involving brother-in-law #3

New Posts

SeriouslySearching said:
I disagree. According to Misty, their intent was to take her against her will which is to abduct/kidnap. They didn't come with the intention of a friendly casual visit, imo. In-laws or not, it is acceptable to protect your family. I know many in-law cases that have ended with a horrible outcome because they thought not unlike you posted. They couldn't bring themselves to stop the violent attack because it was "family".

I didn't say one word about "waving a gun around". Ronald had a gun and should have showed up with it at the door when they arrived, imo. He knew they were up to no good by being there, imo. He should have been prepared to defend himself and his family.
Click to expand...


I did not say Ron was waving a gun around either. Yes, once in a blue moon a family situation can get out of hand..........but Thankfully, most people still use common sense when dealing with these things and they don't esculate to that point.

I'm sure there have been many cases also....that had some redneck not pulled out a gun to start with........no one would have died.

But to say that had he just shot the guy he would have been in the clear.....I value human life more than that.
 
SeriouslySearching said:
I disagree. According to Misty, their intent was to take her against her will which is to abduct/kidnap. They didn't come with the intention of a friendly casual visit, imo. In-laws or not, it is acceptable to protect your family. I know many in-law cases that have ended with a horrible outcome because they thought not unlike you posted. They couldn't bring themselves to stop the violent attack because it was "family".

I didn't say one word about "waving a gun around". Ronald had a gun and should have showed up with it at the door when they arrived, imo. He knew they were up to no good by being there, imo. He should have been prepared to defend himself and his family.
Click to expand...

The way sane, non violent citizens deal with people "up to no good" as you put it, is to stay inside, not answer the door and call 911. NOT open the door and wave a gun in someone's face OR charge into their vehicle and maliciously assault them. We are a people of laws and order...not anarchy. Mr. Cummings is a danger to society and should be put away.

I lived with a man who had a violent tendancy to wave guns in your face...people got shot. That is what happens when you put guns in the hands of the wrong people. IMO, RC should never be allowed to have a weapon anywhere in his vicinity. I do believe in self defense only to save life. Ron nor Misty's life was in danger...so far no kidnapping charges have been brought, so that appears to be without merit as far as LE.

OH...and I own weapons, they are registered and CCP is valid. they never are out unless to clean them and I never answer my door with them in my hand...even alone.
 
tehcloser said:
But it's going to get sticky trying to prove how you were in fear for your life if the guy was in his car leaving............:waitasec: And you had gone in the house, then came back out...........:waitasec:
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter, Misty was still outside and Ron came back out to protect her.
 
LaLaw2000 said:
You say that they were told not to come over and they did anyway. I will not ask for a link because I do not have one for my answer, but, IIRC, Misty is the one who SAYS she told them not to come over. Misty does not own that property and has no say over who comes and goes from there. GGM did not say that she told them to leave, but it is in the report that the Croslins were attempting to leave and Ronald attacked HC2 after he got back into the van.

ETA: I should have read the rest of this thread before stopping to post this. BUT, the Croslins were attempting to leave when HC2 was attacked again by Ronald.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter. did you read the article about the man(who was a passenger in the car) who shot the guy that jumped in the car to try and rob them. He was fleeing and he was shot.
 
stilettos said:
Would have to be proven by evidence that her life was at risk.
Click to expand...


She got a RO, guess the judge saw some evidence.

I am done with this conversation for now. We will see soon enough since Shoemaker asked for discovery.
 
cajun said:
Why not? People here were in constant contact with KP
Click to expand...

I am going to joke with you here cajun, so do not shoot me. Got a link? LOL, we all know that there were some who spoke with KP, one or two who spoke with RC's attorney and who knows how many speaking still with the families. I begin to feel that we have all gone around the bend on this case. I just want HaLeigh found and the perp justly punished. Things are happening that I would never have thought could. Peace.
 
Did I read RC should have had a gun in his hand and ready to shoot when he answered the door that night? Some married folk don't like their in-laws but shooting them when they come-a-calling is a little extreme...
 
cajun said:
Why not? People here were in constant contact with KP
Click to expand...

I agree, they probably were, but the big difference is KP was not a criminal attorney nor representing anyone in any type of criminal case. She should have had permission to speak about the case from her client. I'm pretty sure she didn't always/ever get that before she spoke, but at least she wasn't putting her client in danger in a criminal procedure by doing so. Either way, better off she is gone now for everyone.
 
Six months before RC filed for custody he was convicted and avoided prison for possessing drugs....He was set up for monthly payments to the court as a fine. He was making the payments when he took the children and then was arrested AGAIN!!!

He filed for Custody around Aug/Sept of 05. While he was filing, he incurred the below charges in October 2005:

Character Statute Description Disposition Date Disposition
893.13DRUGS POSSESS-CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE W/O PRESCRIPTION 10/18/2005
893.13(6A) DRUGS POSSESS-CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE W/O PRESCRIPTION 10/18/2005
893.147 NARCOTIC EQUIP POSSESS-AND OR USE 10/18/2005
499.03 DRUGS-POSSESS NEW LEGEND DRUG WO PRESCRIPTION 10/18/2005[/b]

These are serious charges. How was this overlooked by the magistrate during the hearing?

People who have read the paperwork filed know that RC told the court he was concerned about his children being around drugs. There was no evidence Crystal had done any drugs, still the court awarded custody to RC. I need to know why, don't you?

After reading the charges filed against him, you must shake your head in wonder. It has been made perfectly clear on paper that he was asking for the children to be taken away from their mother on the premise he didn't want them around drugs.

RC completely deceived the court and was awarded custody under false pretenses as he was doing/selling drugs before and during his request to save his children from being around drugs....
 
Whisperer said:
Six months before RC filed for custody he was convicted and avoided prison for possessing drugs....He was set up for monthly payments to the court as a fine. He was making the payments when he took the children and then was arrested AGAIN!!!

He filed for Custody around Aug/Sept of 05. While he was filing, he incurred the below charges in October 2005:

Character Statute Description Disposition Date Disposition
893.13DRUGS POSSESS-CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE W/O PRESCRIPTION 10/18/2005
893.13(6A) DRUGS POSSESS-CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE W/O PRESCRIPTION 10/18/2005
893.147 NARCOTIC EQUIP POSSESS-AND OR USE 10/18/2005
499.03 DRUGS-POSSESS NEW LEGEND DRUG WO PRESCRIPTION 10/18/2005[/font][/b]
These are serious charges. How was this overlooked by the magistrate during the hearing?

People who have read the paperwork filed know that RC told the court he was concerned about his children being around drugs. There was no evidence Crystal had done any drugs, still the court awarded custody to RC. I need to know why, don't you?

After reading the charges filed against him, you must shake your head in wonder. It has been made perfectly clear on paper that he was asking for the children to be taken away from their mother on the premise he didn't want them around drugs.

RC completely deceived the court and was awarded custody under false pretenses as he was doing/selling drugs before and during his request to save his children from being around drugs....
Click to expand...

bbm

I have nothing to lead me to believe that this is a true statement. IMO, the parents' drug usage was a wash and I suspect that there was additional information to which we are not privy. JMO.
 
Geez! How long does discovery take? :crazy:

Defendant
CUMMINGS, RONALD LEMYLES
Alias

Date # Docket Description
2009-08-06 1 ARREST REPORT - PCSO D/S QUINTIER (ARREST 8/5/09)
2009-08-06 1 BOOKING NUMBER: 09-3225
2009-08-06 1 BURGLARY OF CONVEYANCE WITH BATTERY
2009-08-06 2 DEFENDANT PRESENT FOR FIRST APPEARANCE HRG 8/6/09
2009-08-06 2 ADJ INS P D APPOINTED FOR FIRST APPEARANCE ONLY
2009-08-06 2 SUFFICIENT PROBABLE CAUSE FOUND
2009-08-06 2 $12,5004.00 SECURED BOND SET
2009-08-06 3 AFFIDAVIT OF INSOLVENCY
2009-08-06 4 ORDER APPOINTING PUBLIC DEFENDER FOR 1ST APP HEARING
2009-08-07 5 $12504.00 A-1-24 HOUR CITY BEST BAIL BONDS #2148146
2009-08-07 5 AMERICAN BANKERS INSURANCE CO
2009-08-19 6 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE BY: TERRY J SHOEMAKER
2009-08-19 7 NOTICE OF DISCOVERY
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 89 more.
Total: 2,367 (members: 90, guests: 2,277)

Online statistics

Members online
90
Guests online
2,278
Total visitors
2,368
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,628
Messages
17,972,083
Members
228,845
Latest member
butiwantedthatname
Back
Top