2010.04.24 The Laundry Revisited and GGM Sykes Visit.

[suspicious1]

OR - the nature of the visit was something "not to be spoken of".

Swag, I like your swagger! LOL

This is what I was thinking! Misty didn't tell THAT part because that was not part of her script in the beginning. That's why I believe that GMSykes visit was not just about some laundry. I think that Misty purposely omitted that part and when she mentioned it on her test months later, she had to. The reason why I say she had to is because TN and GMS had already brought it out. Her story had to go along with theirs, KWIM? And that made Misty look worse, IMO.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Brought this over from the MC Statement Analysis thread to comment:

If Misty said "my blanket", I'd want to know: Why is the blanket Misty's? Did she bring it from her (parents) home when she moved in with RC? Was it the blanket from the bed in the Master bedroom that Misty thought of as "her" bed? Was the blanket in a van that Misty drove frequently so she kept a blanket in the van for emergencies?

Each sentence in Misty's statement raises multiple questions. jmo

I don't believe we ever got a reason as to why the blanket was in the van or who "they" was -- but she was referring to the blanket on the master bed. The blanket would have been put in the van that day since she had to take the blanket from the window to use that night.

Misty's statement is "....my blanket was in the van that they took." Misty washed the blanket from the window and Haleigh's blanket which she says smelled like pee. There is never any discussion as to what Jr was covered with, though we also then have Misty stating she covered Haleigh with a sheet.

debs -- you brought up a VERY good point I haven't seen mentioned before. Jr. What blanket was he using while the others were being washed? MC made a point to say that since she was washing blankets, she covered Haleigh up with a sheet. Jr was supposedly sleeping in her & RC's bed, so there wouldn't be a blanket on it --- what was he covered with??? Makes one wonder even more IF he was there . . . .

 

[SoSueMe]

I'm not convinced GGMS was there at all that night. I'm not saying she wasn't, I'm just not convinced of it.

I do have to wonder, after hearing her on NG recently say that Misty was fine and not drugged up, how can that be when Misty and Tommy have admitted to the world that they were smoking pot at 6:00 or 6:30? At the very least, her eyes would have still been red.

 

[raisincharlie]

I'm not convinced GGMS was there at all that night. I'm not saying she wasn't, I'm just not convinced of it.

I do have to wonder, after hearing her on NG recently say that Misty was fine and not drugged up, how can that be when Misty and Tommy have admitted to the world that they were smoking pot at 6:00 or 6:30? At the very least, her eyes would have still been red.

One has to wonder if they were ever around Misty when she wasn't on something. Could make a difference in their perception. GGMa Sykes' impression goes against everything that is known, including Misty, Tommy, and TN's statements. Most of the time I believe GGMa Sykes weighs everything on one scale, how to make Ron look good so there would be no threat of taking Jr. away from them. Jr. is now gone, GGMa Sykes has made too many press statements to now change her tune. Give her credit for remembering her stories, which she can't change now for several reasons.

 

[debs]

One has to wonder if they were ever around Misty when she wasn't on something. Could make a difference in their perception. GGMa Sykes' impression goes against everything that is known, including Misty, Tommy, and TN's statements. Most of the time I believe GGMa Sykes weighs everything on one scale, how to make Ron look good so there would be no threat of taking Jr. away from them. Jr. is now gone, GGMa Sykes has made too many press statements to now change her tune. Give her credit for remembering her stories, which she can't change now for several reasons.

Which makes one wonder why she recently stated how mad she was at Ronald for bringing Misty back into the house after she took off, but what could she do. It flies in the face of her pastoral scene she set for dropping off laundry and all the loving going on.

 

[raisincharlie]

Which makes one wonder why she recently stated how mad she was at Ronald for bringing Misty back into the house after she took off, but what could she do. It flies in the face of her pastoral scene she set for dropping off laundry and all the loving going on.

It is even more perplexing that after being so mad that Ron allowed her back, GGMa Sykes let Misty actually live in her own house for 6 months or better. Contradictions abound.

 

[jessigirl]

I'm not convinced GGMS was there at all that night. I'm not saying she wasn't, I'm just not convinced of it.

I do have to wonder, after hearing her on NG recently say that Misty was fine and not drugged up, how can that be when Misty and Tommy have admitted to the world that they were smoking pot at 6:00 or 6:30? At the very least, her eyes would have still been red.

I guess you would have to experienced ppl in their active "using" of various drugs in order to know the following.Unfortunately I have first hand knowledge of such, along with my only sister being a psychologist that for many years has dealt with addictions in its numerous forms(not to mention a grandfather&uncle also psychologists that practiced many years with substance&behavioral addictions)But mainly from knowledge of dealing with addicts personally I know that addicts who have been using for years and even just months QUICKLY build up huge tolerances to their drugs of choice.Meaning it takes larger and larger amounts of the drug to get them "high", so for the most part "using" addicts settle for "daily" maintenance, meaning that because addictions are so very expensive that an addict usually does not have the funds in order to maintain a daily high, but rather just enough to get by on. As the addict has been actively using for long periods of time and in order to not get "sick"(withdrawl)they must atleast "use" enough to get them "normal"(which sometimes the amt an addict needs in order to just function "normal" alot of times is an amt that would make a non addict high as a kite) All of that said, is just to say that more than likely from what I know about the drug use of these ppl they would definitely fit in the category of having to use to to function "normal" or keep from being "sick" and because of that the person does not appear to be "drugged out", high as a kite", "strung out looking", etc. So, to others Misty, Tommy, etc would not appear "drugged out" as they were using amts that only keep them "normal"...
(sorry if this is confusing , tried to explain as best I could)

 

[aoibhinn]

There was one very very telling thing about GGMS and the laundry that came out of that interview. Perhaps even more so than the subtle little specific details such as shirt colors.

GGMS admitted that she always does just the kids laundry. "So they don't have stains". Sorry but that act of just stepping in to keep the kids in clean clothes is a rather blatant sign that this was not a happy and well cared for household. Rather the other family members literally saw these kids being neglected and forced to run around in filth. They knew that the adults were not properly caring for those kids,a nd that the primary caregivers were at best simply ignoring the children. Sadly the only action that any of them seem to have taken was in the long run just more enabling. GGMS doing the laundry.

I think we have to look at some things in perspective. Many grandparents help out their offspring when they are a young family and overwhelmed, it's not an unusual thing to do. Sometimes even against the young parents will, lol, you will have the doting but overbearing grandparents chiming in with offers of help and an overabundance of advice. However, this wasn't quite the picture here.
Instead of doing the laundry, a bigger favour would have been to ensure the intervention of Child Care or Community Care Workers. That was the assistance that was required in this household and didn't get there in time, eventhough we know DCF had been checking up.

It is even more perplexing that after being so mad that Ron allowed her back, GGMa Sykes let Misty actually live in her own house for 6 months or better. Contradictions abound.

Again, grandparents, especially those who have had a hand in raising their grandchildren (in this case Rob) can have a big problem saying no when it's the correct route to go. Having been partially raised by my own grandparents, I can say that I knew how to wind them around my little finger when I felt so inclined. They found it very hard to say no, even when the outcome was detrimental in the long run.

 

[debs]

I guess you would have to experienced ppl in their active "using" of various drugs in order to know the following.Unfortunately I have first hand knowledge of such, along with my only sister being a psychologist that for many years has dealt with addictions in its numerous forms(not to mention a grandfather&uncle also psychologists that practiced many years with substance&behavioral addictions)But mainly from knowledge of dealing with addicts personally I know that addicts who have been using for years and even just months QUICKLY build up huge tolerances to their drugs of choice.Meaning it takes larger and larger amounts of the drug to get them "high", so for the most part "using" addicts settle for "daily" maintenance, meaning that because addictions are so very expensive that an addict usually does not have the funds in order to maintain a daily high, but rather just enough to get by on. As the addict has been actively using for long periods of time and in order to not get "sick"(withdrawl)they must atleast "use" enough to get them "normal"(which sometimes the amt an addict needs in order to just function "normal" alot of times is an amt that would make a non addict high as a kite) All of that said, is just to say that more than likely from what I know about the drug use of these ppl they would definitely fit in the category of having to use to to function "normal" or keep from being "sick" and because of that the person does not appear to be "drugged out", high as a kite", "strung out looking", etc. So, to others Misty, Tommy, etc would not appear "drugged out" as they were using amts that only keep them "normal"...
(sorry if this is confusing , tried to explain as best I could)

TN explains that Misty was "so exhausted" when she came back from her binge. TN's story that Misty came home Sunday night is one of the problem areas in this case, since Misty's friends say they dropped Misty off Monday "at her brother's house." Misty had to be paid to watch the kids. I cannot imagine showing up at my child's house and seeing a teenager attempting recoup from such a weekend, who was either as you say maintaining her high or tweaking because she was coming down from it and come up with "she seemed fine." GGM was mad Misty was there at all. She's said so. She was mad because she'd left Ron to go party. NONE of that can add up to "Misty was fine" when GGM brings the laundry, because either way you slice it (coming home Sunday and staying up all night hashing out the relationship differences, or coming home Monday only to be tied into babysitting by TN), Misty was at least operating on a significant lack of sleep, and that doesn't equate to fine in anyone.

 

[Baxter]

I guess you would have to experienced ppl in their active "using" of various drugs in order to know the following.Unfortunately I have first hand knowledge of such, along with my only sister being a psychologist that for many years has dealt with addictions in its numerous forms(not to mention a grandfather&uncle also psychologists that practiced many years with substance&behavioral addictions)But mainly from knowledge of dealing with addicts personally I know that addicts who have been using for years and even just months QUICKLY build up huge tolerances to their drugs of choice.Meaning it takes larger and larger amounts of the drug to get them "high", so for the most part "using" addicts settle for "daily" maintenance, meaning that because addictions are so very expensive that an addict usually does not have the funds in order to maintain a daily high, but rather just enough to get by on. As the addict has been actively using for long periods of time and in order to not get "sick"(withdrawl)they must atleast "use" enough to get them "normal"(which sometimes the amt an addict needs in order to just function "normal" alot of times is an amt that would make a non addict high as a kite) All of that said, is just to say that more than likely from what I know about the drug use of these ppl they would definitely fit in the category of having to use to to function "normal" or keep from being "sick" and because of that the person does not appear to be "drugged out", high as a kite", "strung out looking", etc. So, to others Misty, Tommy, etc would not appear "drugged out" as they were using amts that only keep them "normal"...
(sorry if this is confusing , tried to explain as best I could)

I disagree with your assessment of Misty and Tommy regarding their drug use. I am sure when they are short on money or drugs, they would use a maintenance dose. For the most part, they were drugged out and looked drugged out. Tommy even admitted on one of the tapes, where he was interviewed by le as being "high as a kite"

Misty just got back from a 3 day drug bender. RC looks wasted in a lot of his interviews. All of the people in prison for drug trafficking looked like they have been sampling the products often. IMO

 

[TxLady2]

LE seems to accept Gma's story that she came by that night between 7 and 8. I'm sure they would have talked to her the night Haleigh went missing, and the first thing they will ask is, when was the last time you saw her? Just because we didn't hear about this until 9 days later doesn't mean LE didn't know about it the first day. It just didn't get told to NG right away. Imagine that.

 

[aoibhinn]

I guess you would have to experienced ppl in their active "using" of various drugs in order to know the following.Unfortunately I have first hand knowledge of such, along with my only sister being a psychologist that for many years has dealt with addictions in its numerous forms(not to mention a grandfather&uncle also psychologists that practiced many years with substance&behavioral addictions)But mainly from knowledge of dealing with addicts personally I know that addicts who have been using for years and even just months QUICKLY build up huge tolerances to their drugs of choice.Meaning it takes larger and larger amounts of the drug to get them "high", so for the most part "using" addicts settle for "daily" maintenance, meaning that because addictions are so very expensive that an addict usually does not have the funds in order to maintain a daily high, but rather just enough to get by on. As the addict has been actively using for long periods of time and in order to not get "sick"(withdrawl)they must atleast "use" enough to get them "normal"(which sometimes the amt an addict needs in order to just function "normal" alot of times is an amt that would make a non addict high as a kite) All of that said, is just to say that more than likely from what I know about the drug use of these ppl they would definitely fit in the category of having to use to to function "normal" or keep from being "sick" and because of that the person does not appear to be "drugged out", high as a kite", "strung out looking", etc. So, to others Misty, Tommy, etc would not appear "drugged out" as they were using amts that only keep them "normal"...
(sorry if this is confusing , tried to explain as best I could)

I agree with you here. While this lot may have looked pale, run down and sickly, they could be 'high' and it would not be apparent or at least very obvious.

Even though Misty and Tommy had smoked a joint, they would probably not have been red-eyed and giggling, like someone that wasn't used to the effects would be. People that use pot daily, do not appear 'out-of-it' to the casual observer.

Drug users develop a tolerance and do not appear visibly high. This is why there is so much information available for parents about how to tell your child is using drugs, what are the secondary signs to look out for.

I hope that you have conquered your addictions and are now on a better road. Thank you for sharing those personal details with us. It is appreciated.

 

[raisincharlie]

<snip>

Again, grandparents, especially those who have had a hand in raising their grandchildren (in this case Rob) can have a big problem saying no when it's the correct route to go. Having been partially raised by my own grandparents, I can say that I knew how to wind them around my little finger when I felt so inclined. They found it very hard to say no, even when the outcome was detrimental in the long run.

I can't for the life of me figure how a GGMa would allow the person who claims to have slept through the abduction of their great grandchild could ever allow that person to live under their roof, especially with the remaining grand child being present. Especially when that person is known to do drugs and take off for days doing them and other lowly things on top of it.

No excuse is acceptable IMO, unless of course one is covering something.

 

[TaraCrazyHair]

LE seems to accept Gma's story that she came by that night between 7 and 8. I'm sure they would have talked to her the night Haleigh went missing, and the first thing they will ask is, when was the last time you saw her? Just because we didn't hear about this until 9 days later doesn't mean LE didn't know about it the first day. It just didn't get told to NG right away. Imagine that.

If LE accepted the story -- why didn't LE make the timeline concern 8:00 PM to 3:00 AM?

LE said the timeline in question is 7:00 PM to 3:00 AM

I question if LE trusts the visit 100%


(New posting here ... usually a lurker on occasion but my usual board is closed and this one was suggested ..hope it is ok)

 

[Peliman]

Seems to me GGMS was all for the babysitter thing before she was against it. IMO

 

[TaraCrazyHair]

I'm not convinced GGMS was there at all that night. I'm not saying she wasn't, I'm just not convinced of it.

I do have to wonder, after hearing her on NG recently say that Misty was fine and not drugged up, how can that be when Misty and Tommy have admitted to the world that they were smoking pot at 6:00 or 6:30? At the very least, her eyes would have still been red.

Seasoned smoker ....

 

[TaraCrazyHair]

Brought this over from the MC Statement Analysis thread to comment:



I don't believe we ever got a reason as to why the blanket was in the van or who "they" was -- but she was referring to the blanket on the master bed. The blanket would have been put in the van that day since she had to take the blanket from the window to use that night.




debs -- you brought up a VERY good point I haven't seen mentioned before. Jr. What blanket was he using while the others were being washed? MC made a point to say that since she was washing blankets, she covered Haleigh up with a sheet. Jr was supposedly sleeping in her & RC's bed, so there wouldn't be a blanket on it --- what was he covered with??? Makes one wonder even more IF he was there . . . .

I also have wondered if he was even there ....

 

[lillys]

I'm not convinced GGMS was there at all that night. I'm not saying she wasn't, I'm just not convinced of it.

I do have to wonder, after hearing her on NG recently say that Misty was fine and not drugged up, how can that be when Misty and Tommy have admitted to the world that they were smoking pot at 6:00 or 6:30? At the very least, her eyes would have still been red.

Hon, pot smokers love Visine and other eye drops for that very reason.

 

[aoibhinn]

I can't for the life of me figure how a GGMa would allow the person who claims to have slept through the abduction of their great grandchild could ever allow that person to live under their roof, especially with the remaining grand child being present. Especially when that person is known to do drugs and take off for days doing them and other lowly things on top of it.

No excuse is acceptable IMO, unless of course one is covering something.

Exactly. She may think she's acting out of love or family protection or whatever, but in an instance this serious, you just have to cut the ties. This is reminding me of the Caylee case and how the family have seemingly closed in around Casey. I expect GGMS doesn't want to lose Rob to the death penalty.

I've just been reading how all of a sudden TN and GGMS started to protect Misty. Around the time of the TM polygraphs.

GGMS probably loves Ron more and is closer to him than she was to Haleigh. If she really loved him, she would make him see that he has to own whatever he has done and take responsiblity for it. That's real love.

I'm relating to this because my own grandparents did something for my youngest brother that harmed him dreadfully in the long run. As much as we tried to persuade them otherwise, they were convinced they were acting out of love. It only harmed him and affected our family, i mean no-one outside was hurt, but they ruined his life.

 

[jessigirl]

I disagree with your assessment of Misty and Tommy regarding their drug use. I am sure when they are short on money or drugs, they would use a maintenance dose. For the most part, they were drugged out and looked drugged out. Tommy even admitted on one of the tapes, where he was interviewed by le as being "high as a kite"

Misty just got back from a 3 day drug bender. RC looks wasted in a lot of his interviews. All of the people in prison for drug trafficking looked like they have been sampling the products often. IMO

Im sorry my post detailing an addicts use and how sometimes they use in order to just maintain a "normal" was ONLY speaking about the fact that misty and tommy smoking a joint the night of haleighs disappearance, that the reason they may not have looked or appeared "wasted",or "strung out" was that they were not using copious amounts of multiple drugs(as Misty had been on her 3 day binge) therefor by them merely smoking a joint(what would affect us as normal, non using ppl would make us high as a kite) would merely be enough to maintain or make them "normal". In no way did I attempt to explain all of these ppls multiple "drug state" throughout this nightmare, but rather only explaining how that misty or tommy may have appeared somewhat ok, not completely "drugged out" as of 6-830 pm the night of haleighs disappearance. THE POST WAS IN NO WAY, SHAPE , OR FORM AN ATTEMPT AT EXPLAINING ANY OTHER PERSON OR EVEN OTHER TIME OTHER THAN THAT SPECIFIC NIGHTI just thought it may help to explain to many ppl who have not had the misfortune of dealing with a using addicts behaviors, the differences btwn being "high as a kite" vs. their much needed drugged state of where they are just functioning at "normal".