GUILTY CA - Kris Anderson, 57, murdered, Santa Monica, 11 June 2016 *arrest*

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

You have my sympathy. The postponements are terrible.
But the fact is it never goes away. A family member was murdered 33 years ago. It was 6 years before the trial, conviction, and life sentence.
Since then, it has been 25+ years of appeals and parole hearings. You keep fighting the same battles again and again. You never get to just grieve as the wounds are constantly ripped open again and again.
 
Valiant said:
You have my sympathy. The postponements are terrible.
But the fact is it never goes away. A family member was murdered 33 years ago. It was 6 years before the trial, conviction, and life sentence.
Since then, it has been 25+ years of appeals and parole hearings. You keep fighting the same battles again and again. You never get to just grieve as the wounds are constantly ripped open again and again.
Click to expand...

I am so sorry @Valiant. That’s so unfair to family of victims. My heart goes out to you and your family. :(
 
This is taking a really long time. I knew Theo from high school and it’s really shocking to me that he is accused of this. I have nothing but good things to say about my interactions with him. I’ve seen him stand up for other kids being bullied. He’s rather tall, lean, and muscular. He was a very gifted athlete. Very scrappy too. Imagine Rudy’s work ethic in an athlete’s body. Hard to believe but the police have something against him or else it wouldn’t have gone this far.

In high school, there were rumors that Theo was molested as a young boy. I wouldn’t call his family rich but middle class and from what I’ve heard they and his brother are footing the bill for defense through home equity and retirement savings. His brother has or had a big job at amazon. 500k is the number being thrown around in my circles. They obviously can’t afford his bail or else he would have been out.

There was also word that he was having some discipline issues in his unit which was about to deployed to the Middle East. Theo has never seen “action” and had only ever been deployed to Korea previously.

Last summer there was talk that he was in plea discussions.

this is all the tea I have.
 
This is still listed as happening today - so I shall post it - maybe a video conference? I'll check back later in the day & see if it has changed.

Thursday, April 2nd:
*Pretrial Conference & Trial Setting Hearing (@ 8:30am PT) - CA - Kris Anderson (57) (June 11, 2016, Santa Monica) - *Theo Andrew Krah (28 @ time of crime/31/now 34, Navy SEAL) indicted & arrested (6/13/16) & arraigned (10/21/16) with 1st degree murder. Plead not guilty. $2M bail. (victim is WS JaimeSomers' friend).
Trial was to begin on 1/17/20-no date set as of 4/1/20
Court info from 7/31/18 thru 12/11/19 reference post #202 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/threads/my-friend-was-murdered-last-saturday.310412/page-11
1/17/20 Update: Trial has been continued. No date set. Next Pretrial conference & trial setting hearing on 4/2.
 
Unbelievable.

I just stumbled onto this website looking for info about Theo. He came to mind the other day as I was wondering what ever became of him, not having heard the outcome of his trial I was left wondering...

It's been more than FOUR years since the incident and this still has not even gone to trial??? This is unacceptable for all involved and a violation of 'the right to a speedy trial.' I'm sure the family/friends of Mr Anderson also find this unacceptable.

I wouldn't be surprised to see him released simply for time served. If jury selection was done back in April- wouldn't they have to go through that all again now (if this goes forward on the 25th of this month)? It's been too long.
 
Jackson Flash said:
It's been more than FOUR years since the incident and this still has not even gone to trial??? This is unacceptable for all involved and a violation of 'the right to a speedy trial.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that the accused is the one asking for repeated delays. As a result, the delays are not a violation of his right to a speedy trial as he has effectively waived that right.

Jackson Flash said:
I wouldn't be surprised to see him released simply for time served.
Click to expand...
I would be surprised. The State has evidently rejected the possibility of a plea bargain and is proceeding with the first degree murder charge as "all or nothing".

If the defendant is found guilty, he will be given credit for the four years, but that will probably not result in a release anytime soon. Rather, California's revolving door regarding murder convictions has been stuck in the "closed position" for quite some time.

For example, those convicted of first degree murder must serve at least 21 years in prison. Though this 21 year minimum maybe "on paper", my impression is that early outs under various guises regarding murder convictions have become increasingly less common in California.
 
Last edited:
Cryptic said:
My understanding is that the accused is the one asking for repeated delays. As a result, the delays are not a violation of his right to a speedy trial as he has effectively waived that right.


I would be surprised. The State has evidently rejected the possibility of a plea bargain and is proceeding with the first degree murder charge as "all or nothing".

If the defendant is found guilty, he will be given credit for the four years, but that will probably not result in a release anytime soon. Rather, California's revolving door regarding murder convictions has been stuck in the "closed position" for quite some time.

For example, those convicted of first degree murder must serve at least 21 years in prison. Though this 21 year minimum maybe "on paper", my impression is that early outs under various guises regarding murder convictions have become increasingly less common in California.
Click to expand...

If true, then they will likely get no conviction at all. There's no premeditation. The best the prosecution could hope for would be a manslaughter plea deal, and that very well could be the 4+ years already served. There is NO WAY a jury trial will result in a 21-year sentence for a Navy SEAL who confronted someone he allegedly witnessed taking pictures of little girls. Not in this Epstein era in Santa Monica (next door to Hollyweird). Who can say that there wasn't simply a second confrontation that turned violent when the accused tried once again to take the victim's camera?

By definition of manslaughter - manslaughter

If adequate provocation is established, a murder charge may be reduced to manslaughter. Generally there are four conditions that must be fulfilled to warrant the reduction: (1) the provocation must cause rage or fear in a reasonable person; (2) the defendant must have actually been provoked; (3) there should not be a time period between the provocation and the killing within which a reasonable person would cool off; and (4) the defendant should not have cooled off during that period.

Provocation is justifiable if a reasonable person under similar circumstances would be induced to act in the same manner as the defendant. It must be found that the degree of provocation was such that a reasonable person would lose self-control. In actual practice, there is no precise formula for determining reasonableness. It is a matter that is determined by the trier of fact, either the jury or the judge in a nonjury trial, after a full consideration of the evidence.
 
Jackson Flash said:
If true, then they will likely get no conviction at all. There's no premeditation. The best the prosecution could hope for would be a manslaughter plea deal, and that very well could be the 4+ years already served. There is NO WAY a jury trial will result in a 21-year sentence for a Navy SEAL who confronted someone he allegedly witnessed taking pictures of little girls. Not in this Epstein era in Santa Monica (next door to Hollyweird). Who can say that there wasn't simply a second confrontation that turned violent when the accused tried once again to take the victim's camera?

By definition of manslaughter - manslaughter

If adequate provocation is established, a murder charge may be reduced to manslaughter. Generally there are four conditions that must be fulfilled to warrant the reduction: (1) the provocation must cause rage or fear in a reasonable person; (2) the defendant must have actually been provoked; (3) there should not be a time period between the provocation and the killing within which a reasonable person would cool off; and (4) the defendant should not have cooled off during that period.

Provocation is justifiable if a reasonable person under similar circumstances would be induced to act in the same manner as the defendant. It must be found that the degree of provocation was such that a reasonable person would lose self-control. In actual practice, there is no precise formula for determining reasonableness. It is a matter that is determined by the trier of fact, either the jury or the judge in a nonjury trial, after a full consideration of the evidence.
Click to expand...

After the altercation at the pier when the police talked to both men, and witnesses, and also looked at the victims phone, they “found no evidence of a crime” and “neither party wanted to press charges”, according to the police report. Both parties left.
If the alleged perpetrator followed the victim from the pier and killed him in front of an ATM camera, as alleged, that may be considered premeditated murder. Santa Monica also has other security cams besides the ATM camera, it’s a busy place lined with many businesses, restaurants, bars and shops between the pier and that ATM.
The judge didn’t put him under $2 million bond for nothing. The police/prosecution had to have some evidence.
Also, I’m pretty sure websleuths has a rule against blaming the victim. There’s no evidence that the victim was a sexual predator, and even Navy Seals don’t get to act as judge, jury, and executioner on the streets of our country.
 
Last edited:
Jackson Flash said:
If true, then they will likely get no conviction at all. There's no premeditation.
Click to expand...
As Everybodi mentioned, pre meditation does not need to have been planned elaborately, nor does it need to have been planned far in advance.

If Theo followed Anderson off the pier and attacked him, then that constitutes pre meditation. This is doubly so if it occurred after Theo initiated a prior confrontation against him.
Jackson Flash said:
There is NO WAY a jury trial will result in a 21-year sentence for a Navy SEAL who confronted someone he allegedly witnessed taking pictures of little girls. Not in this Epstein era in Santa Monica (next door to Hollyweird).
Click to expand...

Though I highly disagree with "NO WAY"- and the defense may also disagree as they keep asking for delays, I do agree that the defense will present a spin that Theo was attempting to protect children.

Of course, the victim apparently has no criminal record, the purportedly sexual photos were seen by a police man and determined to be non criminal, and Theo had already initiated a confrontation and was told to leave the victim alone. In the absence of other extremely negative elements, my guess is that the spin does not go far with the jury.

Going subjective....

I have been to the Santa Monica pier many times. The place is crowded. It is also has a very long standing "live and let live" vibe- meaning people leave other people alone unless one has very good reason not to.

Spend any amount of time there, and you will see another human doing something you don't like- guaranteed. On one occasion for me, it was the doped street performer in Christ like garb with a blasphemous sign / garbled "jokes". The Moslem couple nearby may well of had stronger negative thoughts. All three of us walked away.

Likewise, weirdos, including annoying ones, are a dime a dozen. Yet, despite the crowds, the weirdos, and some humans doing things to alienate others, people initiating confrontations about anything appear to be very rare.

In this case, a confrontation was initiated for very flimsy reasons (victim was simply taking pictures of people in a very public place where photography is very accepted. The victim was not attempting to converse with the girls, nor was he following from the arcades to the rides, nor was he strangely positioned for say, "up skirt" photos).

My guess is that a local jury is going to give more weight to the fact that a needless confrontation was repeatedly initiated than they will his military service accomplishments or the essentially un-articulated sexual elements.
 
Last edited:
everybodhi said:
After the altercation at the pier when the police talked to both men, and witnesses, and also looked at the victims phone, they “found no evidence of a crime” and “neither party wanted to press charges”, according to the police report. Both parties left.
If the alleged perpetrator followed the victim from the pier and killed him in front of an ATM camera, as alleged, that may be considered premeditated murder. Santa Monica also has other security cams besides the ATM camera, it’s a busy place lined with many businesses, restaurants, bars and shops between the pier and that ATM.
The judge didn’t put him under $2 million bond for nothing. The police/prosecution had to have some evidence.
Also, I’m pretty sure websleuths has a rule against blaming the victim. There’s no evidence that the victim was a sexual predator, and even Navy Seals don’t get to act as judge, jury, and executioner on the streets of our country.
Click to expand...

Nobody is 'blaming' the victim. I'm not after anything but the truth. I'm pretty sure there is also some sort of rule somewhere about everyone having the right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence.
 
Last edited:
Cryptic said:
As Everybodi mentioned, pre meditation does not need to have been planned elaborately, nor does it need to have been planned far in advance.

If Theo followed Anderson off the pier and attacked him, then that constitutes pre meditation. This is doubly so if it occurred after Theo initiated a prior confrontation against him.


Though I highly disagree with "NO WAY"- and the defense may also disagree as they keep asking for delays, I do agree that the defense will present a spin that Theo was attempting to protect children.

Of course, the victim apparently has no criminal record, the purportedly sexual photos were seen by a police man and determined to be non criminal, and Theo had already initiated a confrontation and was told to leave the victim alone. In the absence of other extremely negative elements, my guess is that the spin does not go far with the jury.

Going subjective....

I have been to the Santa Monica pier many times. The place is crowded. It is also has a very long standing "live and let live" vibe- meaning people leave other people alone unless one has very good reason not to.

Spend any amount of time there, and you will see another human doing something you don't like- guaranteed. On one occasion for me, it was the doped street performer in Christ like garb with a blasphemous sign / garbled "jokes". The Moslem couple nearby may well of had stronger negative thoughts. All three of us walked away.

Likewise, weirdos, including annoying ones, are a dime a dozen. Yet, despite the crowds, the weirdos, and some humans doing things to alienate others, people initiating confrontations about anything appear to be very rare.

In this case, a confrontation was initiated for very flimsy reasons (victim was simply taking pictures of people in a very public place where photography is very accepted. The victim was not attempting to converse with the girls, nor was he following from the arcades to the rides, nor was he strangely positioned for say, "up skirt" photos).

My guess is that a local jury is going to give more weight to the fact that a needless confrontation was repeatedly initiated than they will his military service accomplishments or the essentially un-articulated sexual elements.
Click to expand...

Santa Monica pier might be like Gotham for all I know- I've never been there. What's clear is that Theo Krah saw himself as Batman-- a guardian and protector of a more innocent time. He was standing up for what he believed was right and against what he saw as wrong. Did he cross a line? It really appears that he did.

But following Mr Anderson does not constitute pre-meditation to commit murder. We don't know his mindset, so you can't present it as fact that the mere act of following him from the Pier automatically means that all along he was planning to kill the man. The more likely (think about it) scenario is that Krah followed Anderson because he was unsatisfied with the Police response that saw Anderson go free with nothing more than a reprimand. His intent may have been to confront Anderson again, or to take that camera from him to present as evidence, or even to lay a lickin' on him to teach him a lesson. WE DON'T KNOW. That's what trials are for.

(If he ever gets one). I'm saying that without knowing his intent we can't stipulate "pre-meditated murder" and because of that- I believe the Prosecutors overcharged and that usually leads to a plea deal to a lessor charge (manslaughter) or an acquittal in front of a jury who may be sympathetic to a man who may himself have been sexually abused, and whose SEAL status and lethal training may have resulted in an unintentional slaying that stemmed from that second confrontation.
 
Jackson Flash said:
Nobody is 'blaming' the victim. I'm not after anything but the truth..
Click to expand...

You are, however, directly suggested that the victim was a sex predator with an interest in young girls. There is nothing concrete in the victim's behavior or record that would allow this possibility to be articulated.

For example, there is no evidence that say:

The victim had a criminal records of any sort, let alone a sexual one. That he was attempting to initiate conversations with young girls. That he had been the subject of past complaints. That he was following girls around. Or was seen say, under some stairs with a camera or "accidently" (sadly, maybe even legally in California) going into a girls restroom etc.

Thus, in the absence of articulable points, an allegation that the victim might of been a sex predator is slanderous. Heck, what might you be? Or, for that matter, what might I be?
 
Last edited:
Cryptic said:
You are, however, directly suggested that the victim was a sex predator with an interest in young girls. There is nothing concrete in the victim's behavior or record that would allow this possibility to be articulated.

For example, there is no evidence that say:

The victim had a criminal records of any sort, let alone a sexual one. That he was attempting to initiate conversations with young girls. That he had been the subject of past complaints. That he was following girls around. Or was seen say, under some stairs with a camera or "accidently" (sadly, maybe even legally in California) going into a girls restroom etc.

Thus, in the absence of articulable points, an allegation that the victim might of been a sex predator is slanderous. Heck, what might you be? Or, for that matter, what might I be?
Click to expand...

<modsnip> Please show where it was that I "directly suggested that the victim was a sex predator with an interest in young girls."

<modsnip>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jackson Flash said:
But following Mr Anderson does not constitute pre-meditation to commit murder. We don't know his mindset, so you can't present it as fact that the mere act of following him from the Pier automatically means that all along he was planning to kill the man. n.
Click to expand...

Your line of thought seems to be:

Nobody can read minds. The alleged attacker never stated his intent. So, pre meditated murder can't be proven. Therefore, the charge is not valid.

Yet....tens of thousands of people have been convicted of first degree murder in this country without mind reading and without a stated intent.

At the end of the day, the defendant needs to face reality and realize that there is nothing stretched or creative regarding the charges. Rather, he faces the very real possibility of a First Degree murder conviction.
 
Last edited:
<modsnip: Quoted post was modsnipped>

Jackson Flash said:
There is NO WAY a jury trial will result in a 21-year sentence for a Navy SEAL who confronted someone he allegedly witnessed taking pictures of little girls. Not in this Epstein era in Santa Monica (next door to Hollyweird).
Click to expand...

<modsnip>
Do you think there is sufficient reason to believe that the victim was a sex predator? Or are you simply stating that the defendant thought he was a sex predator and a jury might agree?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jackson Flash said:
Nobody is 'blaming' the victim. I'm not after anything but the truth. I'm pretty sure there is also some sort of rule somewhere about everyone having the right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence.
Click to expand...

"Innocent until proven guilty" is a judicial principle to be maintained throughout the judicial process. Websleuths members are not part of that process and are allowed to express their opinions and speculation on the information presented to them via MSM and/or LE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 55 more.
Total: 1,788 (members: 56, guests: 1,732)

Online statistics

Members online
56
Guests online
1,732
Total visitors
1,788
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,255
Messages
18,184,757
Members
233,285
Latest member
Slowcrow
Back
Top