I found a good article giving the latest news on Haleigh Cummings. Everyone is hoping that, now that all the persons of interest are behind bars, maybe someone will provide actual evidence as to the little girl’s fate instead of more lies. Quote from the article, from a law professor: “Some people take their secrets to the grave. Some people, when those cold steel doors close behind them, start singing like a magpie.” Another quote from a different source: “Once reality sets in and they say, oh boy, 15 years is a long time and 25 years is a long time, I think that will be a great motivator to try to rehash their plea agreement.”
The latest story is that Misty’s cousin Joe Overstreet came to the home that night looking to steal a machine gun that wasn’t there, and when he couldn’t find it he got mad and took Haleigh instead. He and Misty’s brother Tommy drove to the St. John’s River and threw Haleigh in the water.
The story makes no sense. Why would Overstreet take Haleigh just because he couldn’t find a gun? Why would he kill her? Why would Misty and Tommy wait so long to come forward with this information? Why didn’t the police find anything when they searched the river for Haleigh’s remains?
Ronald has agreed to testify in any future criminal proceedings about Haleigh’s disappearance. However, of the lot of them, Ronald is the one person whom I think might actually not know anything. He definitely wasn’t there the night Haleigh disappeared, and as dysfunctional as he is, it does look like he loves his children.
The Charley Project Blog 
A magpie? Never knew they sang like a canary. lol
The gun story is just dumb. If somebody wants a machine gun, that’s all they want and they don’t waste their time kidnapping some kid in place of the gun.
Somebody will only start talking for reduced time if they can throw somebody else under the bus. And what if more than one decides to try and cut a deal? How will anybody know who’s story is true
Quite so. That’s the perennial problem with trying to convict suspected criminals on the basis of deals with other criminals. Even reasonably honest, decent types would be sorely tempted to lie if they were facing decades behind bars.
So how does anybody make any money at all at that job? Am I missing something? Sounds to me he only gets the ten percent as profit, and most bonds aren’t going to be in the millions with big ten percents.
Isn’t it interesting how often that lie or a variation of it is told, when a family member is responsible for a child’s disappearance. I still say some old-school KGB-type interrogation would fix a lot of what is wrong in that family. And I agree about the poor dad, he may not be much, but he genuinely loves his kids.
I think the reason Ron would be willing to testify, besides the fact I don’t think he had anything to do with his daughter vanishing, is that he’s one of the few people involved who cares about her.