TX - Trial of Robert Durst in the murder of Morris Black

New Posts

Good documentary, but it does it bring up the issue of withholding evidence or how much was coordinated with police. I've read some articles today and it's very murky.

One thing I wished is that would have shown video reactions of the overly sympathetic Galveston jurors after showing them the letter evidence and Durst's admissions.
 
RadarLuv said:
I just read that his attorney said "Let's go to LA for a trial". So casual that it sounds like they are going to play win a basketball tournament or something. So cocky.
Click to expand...

He's earned his cockiness. Anyone who can get a guy who dismembers someone off on self defense should be cocky. JMO

RadarLuv said:
Are you watching it live? Or on demand online?

Also, for those that are interested I believe I read that it will be airing all episodes back to back tomorrow on HBO. But its a great option, if you don't have HBO, yet have cable, you can on demand it for free.
Click to expand...

Yeah tomorrow. I said today earlier, but it is tomorrow.
 
Smelly Squirrel said:
Good documentary, but it does it bring up the issue of withholding evidence or how much was coordinated with police. I've read some articles today and it's very murky.

One thing I wished is that would have shown video reactions of the overly sympathetic Galveston jurors after showing them the letter evidence and Durst's admissions.
Click to expand...

They are not under obligation like LE is. They found something and then they had it checked out but the police have had the information for years. Don't forget this documentary is from 2013.

It had been 2000 since she was killed it was not like it was a hot crime. If it had happened while they were shooting and they found something to help, that would bother me, But I think they are fine in the way they handled this. Heck it has been 33 years since Kathy went missing. It is not like all of this was time sensitive.
 
Luvrosco said:
Radar, I agree and what got me was that they basically admitted they embellished the whole Pirro story. How is lying allowed? I don't get it.
Click to expand...

They didn't lie. They said that Pirro was out to get him and she was so that is not lying. That loss is not a win for the defense but a loss for the prosecution.. Much like Casey Anthony case. Over confident and thinking they have a slam dunk they go for the fences.
 
ScarlettScarpetta said:
They are not under obligation like LE is. They found something and then they had it checked out but the police have had the information for years. Don't forget this documentary is from 2013.

It had been 2000 since she was killed it was not like it was a hot crime. If it had happened while they were shooting and they found something to help, that would bother me, But I think they are fine in the way they handled this. Heck it has been 33 years since Kathy went missing. It is not like all of this was time sensitive.
Click to expand...

Depending on how they handled it, it could be obstruction of justice. But I suppose they would have cleared whatever they did with their lawyers. But beyond the legal obligation, there's a moral obligation. It's strange that they waited until just yesterday to arrest him, if they had the envelope evidence for years. If the arrest is due to Durst's admissions on tape, when did the police learn of that? Did they find out only when the episodes aired? Durst could have fled again. When he was arrested, he was at a hotel under a fake name with fake driver's license. I hope he was being watched.
 
RadarLuv said:
If he was trying to get to Cuba lke someone said, he could have been trying to fly up to Canada, but why NOLA? Maybe because he was too recognizable in HOU to go to IAH?
Click to expand...

I believe that if he had fled to Canada, he would be returned to the US to face trial, due to the extradition treaty we have with Canada. We don't have an extradition treaty with Cuba, and Sat. was the first day for non-stop flights between NOLA and Cuba. If he had made it to Cuba, the US couldn't force the Cuban government to return him to face trial and I believe he would have lived the rest of his days there, free from consequences.
IMO
 
Smelly Squirrel said:
Depending on how they handled it, it could be obstruction of justice. But I suppose they would have cleared whatever they did with their lawyers. But beyond the legal obligation, there's a moral obligation. It's strange that they waited until just yesterday to arrest him, if they had the envelope evidence for years. If the arrest is due to Durst's admissions on tape, when did the police learn of that? Did they find out only when the episodes aired? Durst could have fled again. When he was arrested, he was at a hotel under a fake name with fake driver's license. I hope he was being watched.
Click to expand...

I don't think so at all. From what I understand they were working with police and let them know when they had the information. They safeguarded but I don't think there will be any issue at all from LE. HOWEVER, I do believe that the defense will try and use it somehow.
I think that in the end it does not matter because the police received the note from Durst about Susan in 2000 and the other note found written to her was found later but they could use many many other handwriting samples as they did in the movie to compare the handwriting. They found matches on all kinds of documents.

The admission they did not even know they had right away.
 
No, no. I meant that he would have fled to Canada to get to Cuba. Considering he had fake ID, etc, Canada would have never known who he was even if he was on a watch list.

jennapuppy said:
I believe that if he had fled to Canada, he would be returned to the US to face trial, due to the extradition treaty we have with Canada. We don't have an extradition treaty with Cuba, and Sat. was the first day for non-stop flights between NOLA and Cuba. If he had made it to Cuba, the US couldn't force the Cuban government to return him to face trial and I believe he would have lived the rest of his days there, free from consequences.
IMO
Click to expand...
 
Luvrosco said:
Does anyone who's from TX know if the lead attorney that represented him in Galveston know if he's also licensed to practice in CA? I know he is considered one of the best.
Click to expand...


Looks like Deguerin is on board and possibly Chip Lewis
"We came here to waive arraignment and go back to California and get it on," Durst lawyer Dick Deguerin said. "Bob Durst didn't kill Susan Berman. He's ready to end all the rumor and all the speculation and have a trial.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/03/16/durst-hbo-murder-hearing/24837005/
 
RadarLuv said:
No, no. I meant that he would have fled to Canada to get to Cuba.
Click to expand...

I see. You do have a point about being recognized at IAH. I wonder if they had him under surveillance or put a GPS tracker on his car.
 
How did those jurors say not guilty in the 2003 trial? I thought it was beyond stupidity.
 
Tempst said:
How did those jurors say not guilty in the 2003 trial? I thought it was beyond stupidity.
Click to expand...

It really was.. But the state was going for first degree murder.
The only question I would have asked Durst was where is the head? If it was self defense tell us where the head is?? Because he went down and got it. He left the bags that he opened up with it in it on the dock and took the head somewhere else and buried it.
NO ONE does that in self defense. The state was way to cocky and lost the forest for the trees.
 
ScarlettScarpetta said:
It really was.. But the state was going for first degree murder.
The only question I would have asked Durst was where is the head? If it was self defense tell us where the head is?? Because he went down and got it. He left the bags that he opened up with it in it on the dock and took the head somewhere else and buried it.
NO ONE does that in self defense. The state was way to cocky and lost the forest for the trees.
Click to expand...
I heard his story through Dominick Dunne's Power, Privilege, and Justice , it was so unbelievable, what were those jurors thinking about?
 
ScarlettScarpetta said:
I don't think so at all. From what I understand they were working with police and let them know when they had the information. They safeguarded but I don't think there will be any issue at all from LE. HOWEVER, I do believe that the defense will try and use it somehow.
I think that in the end it does not matter because the police received the note from Durst about Susan in 2000 and the other note found written to her was found later but they could use many many other handwriting samples as they did in the movie to compare the handwriting. They found matches on all kinds of documents.

The admission they did not even know they had right away.
Click to expand...

You don't think what?

I doubt the defense can make use of any of this that I'm talking about. The evidence stands regardless. But as I said it's all very murky about what the police knew and when. Jarecki even makes a point of saying they didn't want to give it to police so they could get the interview footage.

Robert Durst murder case complicated by HBO's big role - LA Times

In an interview with "Good Morning America," director Andrew Jarecki said the interview was taped three years ago but that particular line was discovered much more recently when editors went through outtakes. He said his team has been "in contact" with police for two years and that he did not have any type of deal about when Durst would be arrested.
Click to expand...

According to that, they did the interview 3 years ago, but only filled in police 2 years ago. The story also says they found the bathroom admission a year ago, but it doesn't say when police knew about it. It would seem like a huge coincidence if the arrest now is not related to the finale, yet the police deny that it is.

LAPD says Robert Durst arrest not connected to HBO series 'The Jinx' - LA Times
 
Smelly Squirrel said:
You don't think what?

I doubt the defense can make use of any of this that I'm talking about. The evidence stands regardless. But as I said it's all very murky about what the police knew and when. Jarecki even makes a point of saying they didn't want to give it to police so they could get the interview footage.




According to that, they did the interview 3 years ago, but only filled in police 2 years ago. The story also says they found the bathroom admission a year ago, but it doesn't say when police knew about it. It would seem like a huge coincidence if the arrest now is not related to the finale, yet the police deny that it is.

LAPD says Robert Durst arrest not connected to HBO series 'The Jinx' - LA Times
Click to expand...


I don't see any issues. I am going to bet that the documentary team had attorneys that were letting them know what the guidelines were and where the law could bite them.

Since so much time has passed and the police are aware of everything and have been for some time, I can not at all see it being an issue now. It would have been an issue when they first discovered it, I would think.
 
Dick DeGuerin and "The Verdict"

http://www.texasmonthly.com/content/verdict


DeGuerin won the case, as he has so many high-profile cases, because he takes the time to know the facts and the law better than the police or the prosecution. No detail is too small to escape his notice, no scrap of evidence without its potential redeeming value.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 96 more.
Total: 3,596 (members: 97, guests: 3,499)

Online statistics

Members online
97
Guests online
3,499
Total visitors
3,596
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,857
Messages
17,960,135
Members
228,625
Latest member
julandken
Back
Top