Author Topic: Craig and Kelly can beat the rap! (Read 9269 times)

Norton · « **on:** December 26, 2005, 10:29:44 PM »

If they are smart they can beat this.

Move for separate trials.

At Kelly's trail Craig is called as a witness and admits to the killing. Says Kelly had nothing to do with it.

At Craig's trail Kelly is called as a witness and admits to the killling. Says Craig had nothing to do with it.

Reasonable doubt.

240 is Back · « **Reply #1 on:** December 26, 2005, 10:38:46 PM »

Quote from: Norton on December 26, 2005, 10:29:44 PM

If they are smart they can beat this.

Move for separate trials.

At Kelly's trail Craig is called as a witness and admits to the killing. Says Kelly had nothing to do with it.

At Craig's trail Kelly is called as a witness and admits to the killling. Says Craig had nothing to do with it.

Reasonable doubt.

By your logic...

Everyone who is married could commit murder and get away with it!

You've just unraveled the American Justice System!

Congrats, bro!

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #2 on:** December 26, 2005, 10:42:19 PM »

lol u think bodybuilders are that smart ?

Cavalier22 · « **Reply #3 on:** December 26, 2005, 10:45:24 PM »

yeah me and my wife killed these two guys once and that is what we did. we got off scot free. we didnt even have to hire a lawyer.

Special Ed · « **Reply #4 on:** December 26, 2005, 10:50:30 PM »

Your solution makes three erroneous assumptions:

1. That they haven't made any admissible contradictory statements prior to their trials.
2. That a jury would believe anything they say.
3. That both of their attorneys will violate their ethical obligations by putting them on the stand to lie.

Unfortunately, Craig and Kelly both gave statements on Dec.15th.

And without an attorney in Boston, they likely gave additional statements upon their arrest.

You can be sure that by now, they have given contradicting statements - statements that contradict their own earlier statements AND statements that contradict each others' statements. That should be enough for a jury to completely disregard their testimony and enough for their lawyers to be committing malpractice by putting them on the stand.

Special "Arnie Becker" Ed

240 is Back · « **Reply #5 on:** December 26, 2005, 11:24:42 PM »

Quote from: G o a t b o y on December 26, 2005, 11:21:10 PM

try to tell me with a straight face that Craig Titus isn't the dumbest motherfucker on the planet.

but he's got moxie, i tells ya! moxie!

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #6 on:** December 26, 2005, 11:30:15 PM »

CT is a douche bag

240 is Back · « **Reply #7 on:** December 27, 2005, 12:00:08 AM »

Quote from: bigdumbbell on December 26, 2005, 11:30:15 PM

CT is a douche bag

he has a nice truck.

www.freecraigtitus.com

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #8 on:** December 27, 2005, 05:25:15 AM »

that's a dodge ram 2500

Norton · « **Reply #9 on:** December 27, 2005, 06:30:21 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on December 26, 2005, 10:38:46 PM

By your logic...

Everyone who is married could commit murder and get away with it!

You've just unraveled the American Justice System!

Congrats, bro!

Don't hate the palyers, hate the game - bro!

Norton · « **Reply #10 on:** December 27, 2005, 06:31:57 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on December 26, 2005, 10:38:46 PM

By your logic...

Everyone who is married could commit murder and get away with it!

You've just unraveled the American Justice System!

Congrats, bro!

I didn't realize the power of this forum. Imagine unraveling the American Justice System with a single post. Incredible!

Norton · « **Reply #11 on:** December 27, 2005, 06:35:32 AM »

Quote from: Special Ed on December 26, 2005, 10:50:30 PM

Your solution makes three erroneous assumptions:

1. That they haven't made any admissible contradictory statements prior to their trials.
2. That a jury would believe anything they say.
3. That both of their attorneys will violate their ethical obligations by putting them on the stand to lie.

Unfortunately, Craig and Kelly both gave statements on Dec.15th.

And without an attorney in Boston, they likely gave additional statements upon their arrest.

You can be sure that by now, they have given contradicting statements - statements that contradict their own earlier statements AND statements that contradict each others' statements. That should be enough for a jury to completely disregard their testimony and enough for their lawyers to be committing malpractice by putting them on the stand.

Special "Arnie Becker" Ed

Of course there are assumptions, what case isn't rife with assumptions, but erroneous? You assuming these assumptions are erroneous.

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #12 on:** December 27, 2005, 06:41:40 AM »

dont CT and KR have a designated spokesperson yet ?
oh lord, if they're stupid enuf to execute this scheme and get caught
i doubt they'd be organized sufficiently to have a spokesperson

Dan-O · « **Reply #13 on:** December 27, 2005, 07:36:18 AM »

Quote from: G o a t b o y on December 26, 2005, 11:21:10 PM

Therein lies the problem.

Reflect for a moment on the handling of this whole afair, from the murder to the disposal of the body to the getaway plan, and then try to tell me with a straight face that Craig Titus isn't the dumbest motherfucker on the planet.

Quote from: 240 is Back on December 27, 2005, 12:00:08 AM

he has a nice truck.

www.freecraigtitus.com

Anybody else notice Craig couldn't even park his truck between the freakin lines?? What's up with that?

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #14 on:** December 27, 2005, 07:40:24 AM »

Quote from: Dan-O on December 27, 2005, 07:36:18 AM

Anybody else notice Craig couldn't even park his truck between the freakin lines?? What's up with that?

the vehicle may have been moved from the shopping center to this location. house in back doesnt conform to the commercial zoning around that nail salon which is located in a big commercial corridor

Dan-O · « **Reply #15 on:** December 27, 2005, 07:43:39 AM »

Quote from: bigdumbbell on December 27, 2005, 07:40:24 AM

the vehicle may have been moved from the shopping center to this location. house in back doesnt conform to the commercial zoning around that nail salon which is located in a big commercial corridor

ahhh ok... makes sense......

I was ready to add "parking in two spaces" to Craig's laundry list of offenses.

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #16 on:** December 27, 2005, 07:51:10 AM »

Quote from: Dan-O on December 27, 2005, 07:43:39 AM

ahhh ok... makes sense......

I was ready to add "parking in two spaces" to Craig's laundry list of offenses.

lol yeah
those monster trucks are something else
i cant imagine driving that beast across the continent
very over-the-top for fleeing a crime scene

sarcasm · « **Reply #17 on:** December 27, 2005, 08:04:01 AM »

Quote from: Norton on December 26, 2005, 10:29:44 PM

If they are smart they can beat this.

Move for separate trials.

At Kelly's trail Craig is called as a witness and admits to the killing. Says Kelly had nothing to do with it.

At Craig's trail Kelly is called as a witness and admits to the killling. Says Craig had nothing to do with it.

Reasonable doubt.

nope, if they do that it will piss the jurors off and they'll both get convicted, dumbass.

Norton · « **Reply #18 on:** December 27, 2005, 08:12:06 AM »

Quote from: sarcasm on December 27, 2005, 08:04:01 AM

nope, if they do that it will piss the jurors off and they'll both get convicted, dumbass.

Diffrent trials different juries, dumbass.

buffbodz · « **Reply #19 on:** December 27, 2005, 09:03:22 AM »

What about the law involving a man can't be made to testify against his wife and visa versa.

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #20 on:** December 27, 2005, 09:07:17 AM »

the state doesnt need craiggers in this defense fiasco
KR provides all the evidence without him

oh and nevada is a rich state with plenty of resources to prosecute to the fullest extent possible.
she will be the ultimate champion.

the champion of losers.

Norton · « **Reply #21 on:** December 27, 2005, 09:09:09 AM »

Quote from: buffbodz on December 27, 2005, 09:03:22 AM

What about the law involving a man can't be made to testify against his wife and visa versa.

No law says you can't, just can't be compelled to.

onlyme · « **Reply #22 on:** December 27, 2005, 08:18:38 PM »

the

Quote

vehicle may have been moved from the shopping center to this location. house in back doesnt conform to the commercial zoning around that nail salon which is located in a big commercial corridor

Quickerblade · « **Reply #23 on:** December 27, 2005, 10:31:50 PM »

Quote from: Norton on December 27, 2005, 06:30:21 AM

Don't hate the palyers, hate the game - bro!

hate the spelling.

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #24 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:49:16 AM »

that truck is huge
does it have two gas tanks ?
what's kellys opinion on two gas tanks?