I do not think highly of the Crumbleys (see my past posts in this thread), and I may be gullible, but I do kind of believe that the “fugitives on the run” thing may have been a miscommunication. They could have been told their lawyers were taking care of the appoint for turning themselves in and did not know about this 4pm arraignment (because their phones were off? Because they thought all calls would go to their lawyers?). I believe the lawyers assumed that they would be informed. I believe they weren’t. Now parts are still sketchy… going out of contact was sketchy if true. But I’d be open minded to hear more.
I mean, were the Crumbleys reached about being required to show up at 4pm?
What time was the ATM retrieval and what time did notice to appear go through? Did they go to the bank in Rochester Hills to get the money for the retainer, so that the lawyers could put in NTA? And then go back to their hide out awaiting word on this appointment to turn themselves in? I’m no legal expert, welcome other thoughts.
MOO They were planning a boat trip over the river.
Maybe with help.
Faced with a son writing:
"The thoughts won't stop. Help me."
They also ran away.