Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums

Getbig Bodybuilding Boards => History - Stories - and Memories => Craig Titus & Kelly Ryan Discussions => Topic started by: midknight on February 15, 2006, 01:46:06 PM

Title: Suppressing interview/evidence issue...
Post by: midknight on February 15, 2006, 01:46:06 PM
Anyone know what legal basis the defense team is going on, with trying to suppress all of the interviews with the police? Why was it considered illegal – in their eyes? And if it was, don’t you think that the police would take precautions to secure any criminal evidence that might have come out of those interviews? Police doesn’t have the right to interview suspected criminals? Anyone with legal insight on this issue would be appreciated.
Title: Re: Suppressing interview/evidence issue...
Post by: Junior III on February 15, 2006, 02:07:00 PM
Anyone know what legal basis the defense team is going on, with trying to suppress all of the interviews with the police? Why was it considered illegal – in their eyes? And if it was, don’t you think that the police would take precautions to secure any criminal evidence that might have come out of those interviews? Police doesn’t have the right to interview suspected criminals? Anyone with legal insight on this issue would be appreciated.

Apparently, it was illegal to record (tape) KR & CT statements w/o their consent.  That would make whatever new information gleaned from the statements taped w/o their knowledge inadmissable in court as well.
Title: Re: Suppressing interview/evidence issue...
Post by: midknight on February 15, 2006, 04:52:26 PM
Apparently, it was illegal to record (tape) KR & CT statements w/o their consent.  That would make whatever new information gleaned from the statements taped w/o their knowledge inadmissable in court as well.

I’m just wondering what kind of protocol the police had in place while proceeding with the interview – you would think that this wasn’t their first time interviewing a suspected criminal (?) By nature (maybe not the law) if you answer the questions, aren’t you consenting your response?
Title: Re: Suppressing interview/evidence issue...
Post by: MissWannabe on February 15, 2006, 08:28:13 PM
I’m just wondering what kind of protocol the police had in place while proceeding with the interview – you would think that this wasn’t their first time interviewing a suspected criminal (?) By nature (maybe not the law) if you answer the questions, aren’t you consenting your response?
Yea....You'd think they'd send experienced homicide detectives out for the questioning, in a case like this.  What form of consent do they need to tape a conversation?  Written?  Verbal?
Title: Re: Suppressing interview/evidence issue...
Post by: bigdumbbell on February 16, 2006, 04:30:57 AM
until it's ruled upon its all hearsay
Title: Re: Suppressing interview/evidence issue...
Post by: Childish///AMG on February 16, 2006, 08:02:08 AM
I would say at least "Written"  ??? The verbal could come as they turned on the recorder and say, "Do you agree to talk while this interview is being recorded" I am not a barrister yet, but will be some day 8)
Title: Re: Suppressing interview/evidence issue...
Post by: walking sculpture on February 16, 2006, 08:03:09 AM
I believe that they don't need consent for recording if they are interviewing as part of a murder investigation. In all other cases, consent is necessary. I could be wrong though...


Boy-O-boy, that Craig is a total meathead, Isn't he?......He had a lot of faith in his own B.S., not choosing to remain silent and ask for a lawyer....