This week on Dr. Phil, a father, Tommy Hodges, comes forward saying he doesn’t believe his son, Darby, 19 months old, and Darby’s half-sister Kiera died by accident almost four years ago. He believes their deaths are homicide having occurred just twelve weeks apart.
Tommy accuses his ex-wife, Julia Savage Cummings, and her new husband, Codey Cummings, for causing the death of the children.
I do not believe Codey at all and believe he needs to be seriously looked at in this case.
https://www.eyesforlies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/black-logo-smaller.jpg00Eyes for Lieshttps://www.eyesforlies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/black-logo-smaller.jpgEyes for Lies2014-05-07 11:18:552023-06-18 19:54:04Julia and Codey Talk About Their Children
Amanda Knox spoke out yesterday to Chris Cuomo on CNN. She denies her involvement in the murder of Meredith Kercher and her words, like many times before, stun me.
Listen to Amanda Knox’s speech pattern.
She says, “(huh) I…believe…I mean, I can’t speculate what this judge’s motivations…personal motivations or otherwise…What I can say is that…as…this…case…has progressed…….the evidence…that the prosecution has claimed exist against me….has been…has been proven less and less and less.”
Amanda clearly connects the thoughts of “evidence” with “proven”. The fact she connects these words blows my mind. Most people who are innocent wouldn’t think they have “proven less” anything because there is nothing to prove. Period.
After all this time, I am also stunned at how she can’t make a clear cut rejection of her involvement immediately. Instead she we see incomplete thoughts and hesitations. She tells us the claim has been less and less. To me this is not rejecting her involvement. She is merely saying that they have less and less against her, which supports guilt.
If you were honest and uninvolved, would you even entertain this thought?
I have put dots in place where Amanda hesitates in her words above. What you are seeing is incredible cognition, and the fact that Amanda Knox has to think so much when telling the truth is shocking. If she was not involved and an innocent victim, she wouldn’t have to think to talk about how she is being wrongly accused. It would come out of her strongly and flow without any hesitation and thinking, but we don’t see that. Instead we see incredible control and manipulation, and she still fails.
Next Amanda says, “I did not kill my friend. I did not wield a knife. I had no reason to.”
She finally got out her denial, but it was more important to insult the judge on his personal motivations first. Stunning.
I am surprised she would even entertain talking about wielding a knife. Honest people who were not there or involved would never even consider talking about holding or wielding a knife because its so far from the truth and too painful to even entertain because its flat out WRONG.
She continues, “I….I was…in the month we were living together, we were becoming friends.”
Was Amanda trying to become friends with Meredith? Because at first she says “I was…” and then she says “they were”. Can you see the manipulation added on to the cognition going on? Wow.
Amanda goes on, “A week before the murder occurred, we went out to a classical music concert together. Like…we had never fought. There is no trace of us.”
Amanda’s thoughts are really disjointed. She wants to suggest they didn’t ever fight. She doesn’t deny it, she throws it out as an example “Like we had never fought.” If you notice, she doesn’t say “We didn’t fight!”
Then Amanda’s next thought switches entirely from her being friends with Meredith to “There is no trace of ‘us'” — I suspect she means herself and Raffaele. Why are her thoughts so disjointed? It’s as if Raffaele comes to mind when she thinks about her and Meredith and fighting. Interesting.
Amanda continues, “If Rudy Guede…committed this crime…which he did…we know that because his DNA is there…on the…on Meredith body, around Meredith’s body.”
Wow. Amanda doesn’t own that Rudy Guede actually did this at first. Then she corrects!! If she was innocent, I would expect she would believe Rudy Guede was the murderer for sure without any doubts!! This is a stunner. Why would she question it with the word “IF” unless she knows something different? I think all people accept Ruede Guede’s involvement, and Amanda shows clearly she doesn’t believe it as fact. Wow. The implications here are HUGE and shocking to me.
She continues about Guede, “His hand prints and foot prints in her blood. None of that exists for me and if I were there, I would have had traces of…Meredith’s broken body on me…and I would have left traces of myself….around…around Meredith’s corpse….and I…I am not there…and that proves my innocence.”
This sentence above that Amanda says is fascinating on multiple levels because she shows emotions for the first time and it seems to revolve around Meredith’s “broken body” (aka blood?) being on her. It’s odd she can’t say the word “blood” and that this evokes emotion, too. It seems to really hit a personal cord with her. If you were not there, there would be no emotional connection at this point in the speech for you on this element because there would be no emotional memories, but Amanda has some. I’m blown away. I believe she likely did have blood on her now.
Amanda also says in present tense, “I am not there”. She doesn’t say I WAS NOT there, which is a normal recollection. Instead, we seeing her say what she wants us to believe–not what is the truth.
By Amanda Knox’s response to the question “Were you with Rudy Guede at the apartment that night?”, I do not believe Amanda here. I DO believe she was with Guede. There is a look of fear in Amanda’s face at this point that is palpable.
Listen to Amanda Knox’s loss of confidence when she answers the question of was there a fight over money witnessed that night with Rudy Guede? Amanda says “no” very deflated and without any confidence whatsoever. This is stunning.
At the end, Amanda says, “I truly believe it is possible to winthis and to bring…to bring an end to all of the speculation and the nonsensical theories and really bring peace to everyone who has suffered from this experience.”
Wow.
If you were put in prison for several years, accused of a crime and treated with suspicion as Amanda has for years, would you truly believe you can win? I don’t think so. You would have lost too much already. If you were involved in the murder, however, you might very well think you have won, if you got away with it, wouldn’t you?
This is Amanda’s most revealing interview to date, and it makes sense. The stakes are very high right now for her.
I am also stunned at how Amanda thinks that this case can go to a place for the Kercher family where they will have “peace” (” really bring peace to everyone”). I think anyone of a reasonable mind can see the Kercher’s will never get peace unless someone tells us what truly happened. The only one Amanda is thinking about is herself here. A true victim would know it is unlikely anyone will get the full truth because the investigation is so botched, but not Amanda!
I did not believe Amanda Knox from day one. I have always believed she was there that night and covered her ears at some point (by her own words), but that she twisted facts and lied to cover and protect herself on some level (what level I didn’t know). But the more I see of Amanda Knox, and especially after this interview, I believe she was there, was involved and had blood on her. Physically. That is all I can say, but that say a whole lot.
I’m stunned by what this interview reveals. It will take some time to shake this. I didn’t expect this at all.
https://www.eyesforlies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/black-logo-smaller.jpg00Eyes for Lieshttps://www.eyesforlies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/black-logo-smaller.jpgEyes for Lies2014-05-02 12:38:252014-05-02 12:38:25Stunning Interview by Amanda Knox with Chris Cuomo
It’s hard to believe this Saturday it will be seven years since little Madeleine McCann disappeared.
This is an emotional case for many people and emotional cases will always split the divide on what people believe truly happened.
I have always believed the McCanns from day one and have watched nearly ever video available online of them speaking over the past seven years that I have found, and I have not seen any hotspots in the McCanns.
When you see the McCanns in this video above, you can see the stress in their faces seven years on. They haven’t given up and still want to recover their daughter.
[polldaddy poll=8012798]
https://www.eyesforlies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/black-logo-smaller.jpg00Eyes for Lieshttps://www.eyesforlies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/black-logo-smaller.jpgEyes for Lies2014-05-01 09:19:462014-05-01 09:19:46Kate and Gerry McCann 7 Years Later
MyFoxTampaBay.com has the police report narrative on their website for the Cummings case. If this is the actual police narrative, it shows there are many inconsistencies in the story being told by both Misty Croslin and Ronald Cummings.
Read moreIn the report, once the officers arrived, the cop said Cummings repeatedly said, “Someone took my child”.
Ronald repeadtedly [sic] said that someone had taken his child and also said, “when I find him, I’ll kill him.” Ronald was referring to a 9mm Beretta hand gun [sic] which heowed [sic] inside of his residence and that if law enforcement found whoever had this child, he would shoot them through the back window of the patrol car. I attempted to get information from Ronald regarding HAleigh [sic], however, due to his emotional state he was unable to provide any useful information.
I am in awe at how quickly Cummings ruled out every other potential outcome for his daughter’s absence within minutes of arriving home and finding Haleigh missing. How come he doesn’t have the normal thoughts of parents, and attempt to investigate, or consider other potential outcomes before jumping to one conclusion? Why did he not even once consider she may have wandered off, that the doors or windows could not have been unlocked by other people when he was away? It’s very notable. He clearly didn’t have 30 minutes to do any type of investigation, but he knows the outcome: someone took Haleigh.
I also find it interesting that Cummings was not able to calm himself down for his child’s sake, and help police get the information they needed. I suspect this was a facade, because he didn’t know what to say, personally.
The report continues:
I then made contact with Misty Croslin, Ronalds girlfriend. Misty told me that she had put the children to bed at approximately 8pm. MIsty [sic] said that they were sleeping in HER BED, and when she laid down at around 10:30pm both children were still in bed. I asked MIsty [sic] who the other child was and she advised the other child was Haleighs [sic] brother. Misty old me that she woke up just before 3am to get a drink and she noticed that Haleigh was missing, however the OTHER child was still in bed. MIsty [sic] ran around the residence franticallly [sic] looking for haleigh [sic] and that she noticed the back door was stanfing [sic] open. MIsty [sic] said that she was sure the back door had been locked prior to her going to bed.
There are multiple inconsistencies when reading this segment of the report above, if we compare it to what Misty has said in video interviews. Here Misty tells the police that she was in the SAME bed with Haleigh. Yet we’ve seen Misty say on video that Haleigh was in another bed. Clearly, Misty isn’t able to keep her facts straight.
Notice the time Misty says she went to bed as well? Misty has been saying in news reports that she went to bed at 10:00 p.m. Yet, early on, to the police (here), she is saying she went to bed at 10:30 p.m. Again, Misty is unable to stick to any facts.
Moreover, Misty doesn’t say she got up to go to the bathroom, which she has said all over the news. She says here that she got up to get a drink. She also doesn’t talk about finding the kitchen light on (or at least the police don’t report that here).
By the way this report is written, you get the distinct feeling that Misty told the police that she instantly noticed Haleigh was gone when she got up to get a drink, and then searched for her, whereas in videos, Misty has said she went to the bathroom, noticed the light on in the kitchen and saw the door open, and then realized Haleigh was missing. These are two very different stories.
The report continues:
Mist [sic] said that at approximately 5 minutes after she noticed Haleigh missing, Ronal [sic] arrived home.
In news reports, Misty has told us that she awoke at 3:00 a.m., and that Ronald Cummings came home around 3:30. This is another inconsistency.
Fox’s On the Record with Greta van Susteren, on February 12, even discusses this with Cummings, and notes there is a 27-minute time lapse from when Misty wakes up to when Cummings arrived home.
From “On the Record”:
VAN SUSTEREN: So let me — let’s — let me try to ask you some questions about it. What time did you arrive home, Ronald, on Tuesday morning?
RONALD CUMMINGS, FATHER: Approximately 3:30.
Clearly, the stories of Ronald Cummings and Misty Croslin are not adding up. Nothing in this report supports their latest version of events. What the truth is, of course, I can’t say, because I don’t know. But I know I don’t trust either one of these people. They are not telling us what I suspect they know to be true.
https://www.eyesforlies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/black-logo-smaller.jpg00Eyes for Lieshttps://www.eyesforlies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/black-logo-smaller.jpgEyes for Lies2009-02-18 11:01:002009-02-18 11:01:00Police Report Narrative
Many, many, many of you have asked me to review the case of missing Haleigh Cummings. She went missing last Monday night from her home, and hasn’t been seen or found since. Haleigh’s father, Ronald Cummings, and his girlfriend, Misty Croslin, tell us that Croslin put Haleigh to sleep, later went to sleep herself, and when she woke up to use the bathroom in the middle of the night, she found the kitchen light on, Haleigh was gone, and the back door was wide open, propped by a brick.
Read moreWhen I watch Cummings and Croslin speak, many things jump out at me. They are so numerous, I don’t have the space here to write them all out, but I will identify a few things I’ve noted:
When I first saw Ronald Cummings crying in his first plea for his daughter, several things jumped out at me. His crying episode was eerily reminiscent of a child’s cry. Most adults don’t cry like children. He whined, and acted out of breath, yet he wasn’t. It was notable and perplexing.
Yet he did sound truly congested; however, no tears fell from his face. Later on, however, he did cry very genuine and sincere tears, and the pouting cry notably changes into a regular cry. I find his behavior inconsistent here, and I can’t explain it. Is he under the influence of something? He seems really glassy-eyed.
I am also immediately struck by how he portrays no composure of hope in this interview. He seems to have zero hope that his daughter could still be alive. Why isn’t he hanging onto the fact that if he and others get out there, they can potentially find her? This disturbs me.
Why isn’t he talking to his daughter on camera? “Haleigh, I’m here for you, if you are watching this. I’m going to find you.” Does he even think about her being out there, and watching the news? Why isn’t he thinking about being strong for her?
When I see this interview, it seems to be more about Cummings being devastated than finding Haleigh. It’s like he is feeling sorry for himself. Why? This is odd. Haleigh’s mom, ironically, does talk to her daughter on camera, as I would expect any parent would, if they feared their daughter was kidnapped. She says, “Everybody’s here for you. If you’re watching these, your momma misses you, daddy misses you … your whole family misses you and we will bring you home” (source).
At time marker 1:15, Cummings drops down to the ground crying. This is so unusual for an adult to do. Children do this, but how many adults have you seen do this? Especially when the news is not conclusively devastating yet? How come everyone else who loved Haleigh is so composed and acting “normally”, but Cummings is not? Here his cry is very shallow. It’s not believable for me. If I re-look at this with the angle that Cummings could befeeling sorry for himself, it makes more sense.
He says, “I know somebody took my little girl…some sorry piece of trash that will be wasted when it’s all over.” This is baffling to me. Haleigh was once found floating in a nearby waterway and nearly drowned, so how could he so conclusively rule this out? How can he so confidently rule out that Haleigh didn’t wander away, that he didn’t lock the door as he thought he did, that when Croslin’s relatives came to visit earlier that night, that they didn’t unlock another door or open a window when he was away?
Would you as a parent be so certain about this, especially since you know your daughter wandered away before? This bothers me.
At one point, Cummings says, “All I want is my children…All I want is my child back.” I thought this was very unusual. Another day, he talks about how others are making this situation all about a custody issue. That was really strange, but if we pair that, with this statement above, you have to wonder, is he afraid he won’t have either of his children, perhaps, due to something he has done here? Then this strange slip might actually make sense, wouldn’t it?
Then he says something that unnerved me in a huge way. Cummings says, “I’d give my life for my child’s life back.”
What?
Why is he saying this? It makes no sense. Is that why his cry is so confusing? Does he fake concern and worry, and then really cry over what he may know already happened to his daughter? You would think he would have said instead, “I’d give my life for my child back”, but that is NOT what he says. Does this indicate that he believes his daughter is not alive? Is that why he thought earlier, “All I want is my children…” because he fears if the truth comes out, he will lose them, or at least his remaining son?
It’s troubling, to say the least.
Notice how Cummings reiterates that he is trying to do the best he can, that someone stole his child while he was at work? Is he building an alibi?Setting a timeline? Why isn’t he focusing his energy on getting Haleigh back instead of feeling sorry for himself? Most parents of missing children are focused on getting their children, and don’t care at all about themselves, but Cummings is notably different. Most parents know they have to be strong for their children, and work to bring them home. Why not Cummings?
The reporter then asks, “Can I ask when you noticed the back door was open, and if that was what kind of alerted you to something?” Just before the reporter asks Cummings this, he is crying, sobbing and somber. Then listen to Cummings’ response to the question. His demeanor and voice change dramatically. It’s very notable and very alarming for me. You don’t stop crying and change your entire demeanor when you are deeply sobbing and in pain like Cummings wants us to believe he is. You just don’t do it, yet oddly Cummings does. Cummings says in an angry, deep and controlled tone, “No. My girlfriend was awake at 3 o’clock in the morning when I got off of work.” When he says this, there is a deep anger in Cummings’ voice that appears out of nowhere. It’s chilling. Clearly, this question got Cummings angry. Why would that be?
Later in the interview, Cummings says very strangely and out of nowhere, when he deeply sobs, “I do plan to take the trash out when it is time.” This blindsides you. It’s not related to anything being said at the time. It’s like Cummings is in his own world. I am sure like most people, at first you think, what is he talking about?? It’s absolutely perplexing.
But when I watch him say it and watch his emotions, he shows pure destitution in his face. Like someone sold his soul. It’s absolutely haunting. I can’t help but wonder, is this some type of warning he is contemplating suicide “when it is time”? Perhaps, if he were to get caught?
What else could this statement mean? Is he warning us? Is he under the influence of drugs here and extra emotional? Also, just after he says it, and thinks about it, he also shows true distress and sadness on his face. It’s alarming and notable. But when the reporter asks the next question, all of these genuine emotions fade away again.
The reporter asks, what would you say to people who may have information out there? Notice Cummings doesn’t even think to talk to his daughter again. Why?
Both Cummings and Croslin’s body language in all the videos I see displays a sense of defeat. They are hunched over. Their shoulders come forward. They physically look down, and act subdued. It appears they have no hope whatsoever, again and again, that Cummings’ daughter will be returned to them. This strikes me as very odd. Why aren’t they tense, nervous and anxious to find her? That would be normal. They should be on edge that things might not happen fast enough, yet there is no urgency with these two. Anyone can spot that? Why aren’t these two on a mission to find Haleigh? Compare their behavior to that of George and Cindy Anthony. It’s notably different.
News reports say that on the 911 call, Cummings was in a rage, and really worried about his daughter. I don’t hear that in the call at all. I don’t hear any indication of fear, stress or true and genuine alarm. I hear feigned anger, by his threats and choice of words.
Why did Croslin wait 30 minutes from waking up and finding Haleigh missing to alert someone of the possible abduction? Why didn’t she summon for help earlier? Especially since she knows Haleigh once wandered off and nearly drowned before?
What predator is going to go into a house late at night, and risk taking one child out of a room full of people? Let’s say Haleigh wandered outside; there should have been some proof of a door unlocked or something, but Cummings and Croslin deny that. They, instead, tell us that the door where the predator went out, had to be forced closed, that Haleigh couldn’t open it, and couldn’t reach the deadbolt. This tells us that the door likely stuck when you opened or closed it. That would likely mean the door made a fair amount of noise to open and close it, and it took some effort to open it, right? What predator would use that door?
What predator would turn on a light in the kitchen, risk announcing himself and make it possible to be clearly identified by someone in the house or outside? What predator would take the time to bring or find a cinder block, and take the time to prop the door open? How come there are no signs of forced entry into the home? To me, these are highly unlikely or implausible circumstances.
I also haven’t seen Cummings or Croslin participate in any searches reported by any news agencies. Have I missed this? I have looked for it several times. Has anyone seen them help in the search? Post fliers, or go look for her themselves? If they haven’t, why aren’t they?
Cummings and Croslin have told two different stories of where Haleigh slept that night. This is interesting. You would think their stories would be the same. Cummings told Nancy Grace that Croslin slept in the same bed as the children on February 11. Then on February 12, Croslin says that Haleigh was in a different bed in the same room. Why aren’t they getting their facts right?
Worse, when they are both on Greta van Susteren’s show, Greta asks, “How far was Haleigh physically from you, Misty?” Croslin says, “Probably, like, not three or four inches away.” Look at Cummings’ eyes when Croslin talks. They are plastered towards Croslin though he doesn’t turn his head. It’s very controlling behavior. He is fascinating to watch.
Greta then asks Croslin how far they were apart a second time, and at that time, Cummings shakes his head in a side-to-side motion, indicating he is thinking “no”. With that, Croslin backtracks and says, “No, um, I’m not sure. It wasn’t that far away.” Next, as Greta is talking again getting ready to ask another question, Cummings is trying to coach Croslin, and tell her what to say! I can’t hear what he is saying, but why does he feel the need to do this? Cummings then says, “No, I know where the beds were at. They were about four feet apart from the edge of the bed she was in to the edge of the bed Haleigh was in.”
These two can’t even agree where the beds were placed in this room! Forget about who slept in what bed. This is a huge inconsistency. Clearly, both are capable of describing how far two beds are apart, but if the facts aren’t true, we wouldn’t be surprised to see such a discrepancy, would we?
Earlier on the Greta show, Greta asks Croslin who was closest to the back door: Haleigh or Croslin? Look how long it takes Croslin to answer that. She makes an “Hmmm…I don’t know” expression. Why doesn’t she know? She should spout the answer off without thought, but she doesn’t. She finally answers and when she does, under his breath, Cummings says, “I’d like to comment.” He doesn’t say what is on his mind because Greta didn’t hear him, but it shows he is controlling nonetheless, over and over.
Also in the Greta interview, Cummings says to Croslin, “Look at the camera” at one point. He gives us every indication he has a temper, and is very controlling and manipulative. Cummings also nods his head when hears what Croslin says at points in the interview, as if he approves. He is scrutinizing her every word, and Croslin knows it.
Croslin also keeps saying the same story over and over again. She says something to the effect that she got up, went to the bathroom, found the kitchen light on, and then she went back and found Haleigh was gone. She always finishes it with “That’s all I know.” I find her memory of that event is quite sparse and lacking. You would think she would remember more detail. When we recollect a story, oftentimes, we remember different details, or thoughts–things we were thinking at the time. Yet Croslin seems to have no “thinking memories” of her experience. It is more like she is talking from rote memory. She only repeats the same thing over and over again.
The same is true for her 911 call. The details are sketchy at best. Her memories don’t flow logically. It doesn’t make sense.
911: “911, what’s your emergency”
Misty Croslin: “Hi…umm…we just woke up…and our back door was wide open, and we can’t find our daughter.”
We just woke up?
911: “OK, when did you last see her?”
Misty Croslin: “Um, we like just…you know…it was about 10 o’clock… we were…she was sleeping- I …she?…cleaning…
Why doesn’t she have normal recollections here?
I so hope I am wrong for Haleigh’s sake. It doesn’t look good from where I am sitting now.
* * * To read all of my thoughts on this case, click on the labels below.
https://www.eyesforlies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/black-logo-smaller.jpg00Eyes for Lieshttps://www.eyesforlies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/black-logo-smaller.jpgEyes for Lies2009-02-15 21:25:002009-02-15 21:25:00Ronald Cummings, Misty Croslin and Little Haleigh