Representative Cases

CRAIG PLATT: A DOZEN REPRESENTIVE CASES

(Unlike other lawyers, we do not include client names and docket details in this list out of respect for the privacy and confidentiality of our former clients. In fact we feel it is unethical to do so.)

1. State v. X

Charge: Murder First Degree

Details: Month long murder trial, in which the defendant’s detailed, taped multiple confessions were played repeatedly by the prosecution for the jury to hear. World renowned experts testified for the State, and enormous resources were expended to obtain a conviction.

Result: NOT GUILTY, ALL COUNTS

Interesting Fact: One remarkable aspect to this case was that the jury gave Mr. Platt a standing ovation in the court room both during jury selection and after rendering their verdict.

2. State v. X

Charge: Five Counts Rape of a Child, Child Molestation and Furnishing

Details: Complicated two week trial, alleging multiple counts of rape and child molestation. During the trial, additional security was required due to the notoriety of the case and allegations of threats made by prosecution participants.

Result: NOT GUILTY, ALL COUNTS

Interesting Fact: During the trial, the prosecution attempted to have Mr. Platt jailed for contempt, alleging that his cross examination exceeded legal guidelines. Not only did Mr. Platt defeat this attempt, he responded by using the threats to move that the case be dismissed due to prosecutorial misconduct. Following the verdict, jurors approached Mr. Platt with their input on which actors should play which participants in the movie that should be made about the trial.

3. State v. X

Charge: Theft First Degree

Details: Over $25,000.00 in merchandise allegedly stolen by Defendant. Mr. Platt was able to have all but approximately $1,000.00 dismissed at half time during the trial, due to a legal argument which the court accepted. The remaining allegations were rejected by the jury, who promptly acquitted Craig’s client.

Result: NOT GUILTY

Interesting Fact: The jury lined up to shake Mr. Platt’s hand in the court room as they were exiting the jury box.

4. State v. X

Charge: Rape

Details: A basic trial, but one in which members of the Department of Corrections were allowed to testify against the Defendant, thereby indicating to the jury that he had prior convictions.

Result: NOT GUILTY

Interesting Fact: The jury took only three minutes to render their verdict. By the time Mr. Platt had walked one block from the court house to his office to await the verdict, he was informed by his receptionist as he walked in the door that deliberations were concluded and the jury already had a verdict.

5. State v. X

Charge: Theft

Details: UPS worked allegedly stealing merchandise from UPS deliveries and selling it for profit. A complicated cross examination by Craig regarding the paper trail required to establish guilt, created reasonable doubt.

Result: NOT GUILTY

Interesting Fact: In order to establish the defense, Craig and his investigator had to search locations, which ultimately led the prosecutor to threaten him with prosecution for criminal trespass (a threat which was never acted upon).

6. State v. X

Charge: Burglary

Details: Caught in the act burglary, where Defendant found with accomplices, holding a stolen television as he exited the business exactly when police arrived and arrested him. Tried together with co defendants, who were represented by expensive private attorneys (Craig was with the public defender at that time.)

Result: NOT GUILTY

Interesting Fact: The partner of the most eminent private attorney involved in the trial, requested permission from Craig following the verdict to order a transcript of Craig’s closing argument, so that he could use it in his own high profile cases.

7. State v. X

Charge: Burglary

Details: Once again, caught in the act burglary. Defendant found inside business, which police had surrounded, stolen merchandise bulging out of his pockets, burglary tools in his hands, and his blood on his clothing and spattered inside the business where he had allegedly cut himself breaking into cash boxes.

Result: NOT GUILTY

Interesting Fact: The prosecutor was so angry when he lost that he left the courtroom and locked himself in his office. Too bad, since he missed Mr. Platt following up on his win by having the Defendant’s hold on parole for a murder conviction in another state dismissed since the hold had expired while the case was pending. The prosecutor had been so sure that he would win that didn’t bother to extend the hold. The Chief of Police stated that he intended to appeal the acquittal (not legally possible) and a judge began calling Craig “the magician” following the trial.

8. State v. X

Charge: Child Molestation

Details: Defendant accused of committing offence against family member. Despite that, Craig successfully argued that it was a case of mistaken identity.

Result: NOT GUILTY

Interesting Fact: Craig established during his cross examination of the state’s key witness that she was unable to distinguish between two different uncles, and that this created reasonable doubt.

9. State v. X

Charge: DUI

Details: Defendant, allegedly high on depressants, with a .13 blood alcohol level, drove his car through a red light, rear ending a municipal bus in a busy downtown Seattle intersection, thereby causing thousands of dollars of damage.

Result: NOT GUILTY

Interesting Fact: Craig emphasized that the police had deprived his client of an attorney the night he was arrested, by telling him to find one in the yellow pages. Although the judge refused to dismiss based on this (he was wrong) Craig proceeded to make the same legal argument to the jury, resulting in a very rare example of jury nullification (i.e. a trial where the jury acquits despite overwhelming evidence, due to their disapproval with some legal issue in the case).

10. State v. X

Charge: Burglary

Details: Yet another caught in the act burglary. Client charged with breaking into a business where he was caught by the owner. He managed to escape but was later identified by the witness owner.

Result: NOT GUILTY

Interesting Fact: Craig successfully argued alternative, inconsistent defense theories, a very risky and rare approach. After determining that problems with the alibi defense presented by his client’s family might lead to conviction, Craig took the unusual step of arguing that even if his client had been there he was still not guilty. The judge told him following the trial that it was the best inconsistent defense theory argument that he had ever seen.

11. State v. X

Charge: Child Molestation

Details: Defendant allegedly caught in the act by mother, who testified that she walked in on the crime while it was occurring.

Result: NOT GUILTY

Interesting Fact: Craig’s cross examination of the eye witness mother was so thorough that he made her admit to the jury that she was not really sure what she saw after all. In addition, this is the famous case where the prosecutor objected to Mr. Platt’s jury selection technique, arguing that he was “making the jury think things”. The judge just laughed at the objection and overruled it, saying this was Platt’s job.

12. State v. X

Charge: Delivery of Marijuana

Details: In what was referred to in banner headlines in the local paper as the “Biggest Drug Bust In County’s History” Craig argued that his client who participated in transporting pounds of marijuana from California to Washington for sale to undercover agents, did not understand what was happening. Defendant arrested in the car used to transport the dope, with the contraband still in the trunk, at the scene of the delivery to the undercover agents.

Result: NOT GUILTY of DELIVERY

Interesting Facts: The prosecutor hid evidence potentially helpful to the defense to attempt to obtain a conviction. When the judge attempted to limit Platt’s cross examination of the officers involved, Platt objected, resulting in the judge reading a special instruction to the jury, drafted by Platt, in which the judge told the jury that he had been incorrect in a ruling on this issue and that, in fact, Platt was correct.

Mr. Platt has many, many more accounts of trial wins and amazing case results, including a number of cases dismissed due to procedural regularities, including a First Degree Robbery with Firearm dismissed due to speedy trial violations, and caught in the act Child Molestation dismissed on the same grounds. In addition he has countless examples of favorable plea bargains he was able to negotiate with prosecutors who were tired of fighting with him (and losing) in court. These include cases which began life as possible death penalty murder cases being reduced to manslaughter with minimal prison terms, untold numbers of serious felonies reduced to minor misdemeanors, and a whole host of other amazing results.