The Jinx: New HBO True Crime Show (1 Viewer)

[BobbyLayne]

Friend from daughters school on FB:

"My mom [in Kansas] is FREAKING out because this Durst guy keeps showing up at places in the neighborhood."

BL: Might be because they own pretty much the whole block. Also, he's in jail so tell mom you're safe

 

[fruity pebbles]

As sloppy as this moron is, it's unbelievable he was able to get away with 3 murders

 

[fruity pebbles]

If this show doesn't win an Emmy something's wrong

 

[fruity pebbles]

Guess he had a fake passport, a large amount of money and was planning to flee to Cuba when he was arrested.

 

[comfortably numb]

Guess he had a fake passport, a large amount of money and was planning to flee to Cuba when he was arrested.

And a sammich?

 

[Limp Ditka]

Why's he here 4 months after that interview? I'd have been on a plane before sundown

 

[wikkidpissah]

Good series.

Few things:

- He participated with Jarecki for the same reason AHernandez didn't skip when he had to know he was goin' down - they both think their kills were righteous.

- The blinking. He has two kinds. I've intaked enough psychotics to know that some of his are attempts to master inner processes beyond his control. The longer ones are rinses, washing either lies or unpleasant memories.

- He killed his mother.

 

[Daywalker]

Yeah....episode 5 - was by far the best.

Looking forward to the finale next week.

Yea confronting him with the letter will be interesting.

Hard to see why Durst agreed to do this.

Its so annoying when people - usually cops - say that only guilty people hire lawyers or hiring a lawyer makes you look guilty. That's such horse####. Everyone that is dealing with the cops and could potentially be a suspect should hire a lawyer.

I'm afraid from the previews that Durst got hip to the letter "ambush" and bailed on the 2nd interview.

No one else shares this concern?

Robert A. Durst, the scion of a New York real estate family, was arrested on Saturday in New Orleans on a warrant from Los Angeles County, according to the police.

link

Wow. Once again - what a terrible decision he made to participate with this show.

Egomaniac. Rules don't apply and he can do whatever he wants. Still amazes me that the police couldn't do what a few reporters on a tv show were able to.

I would think the police work shown on this show is pretty much on par for the country.

NY cops don't check out the doorman's story adequately nor the neighbor's. That NY cop was an embarrassment. Especially when he made it seem like the neighbor could easily misremember whether Durst came over for a cocktail at 9pm on a Sunday night that week.

TX makes a mess out of a case where the guy is admitting to chopping up the body.

CA doesn't notice the letter left at the crime scene. "BEVERLEY" cannot be missed especially when it's written by someone who should be a lead suspect.

All of this in high profile cases each time.

 

[On The Rocks]

- He killed his mother.

Tell me more. I'm convinced she killed herself.

 

[MCguidance]

Great series.

He was warned last interview about the "hot" mic, I am skeptical that he's not setting up an insanity defense.

 

[On The Rocks]

"there it is. you're caught".

I've replayed this moment in the last episode a dozen times. Wow!

I almost think he took part in the movie and interviews so he could get caught.

This guy was/is a total sociopath. Super entertaining program. Very well done however I'm also very unsatisfied as to how this ended with no epilogue notes. I would have liked to seen more, but I"m guessing after whatever the next trial brings there could very well be another episode or two added in a year or two.

 

[TobiasFunke]

So this guy walked around free for 4 months after that interview?

A lot longer than that. The interview took place years ago. The NY Times reported that "more than two years passed after the interview before the filmmakers found the audio."

Something about this whole thing (including the Times article) seemed incredibly fishy to me. Saw this Gawker article this morning, apparently I'm not the only one. Not only does their timeline not add up at all, but that would also mean that either: (1) Jarecki decided to let Durst walk around a free man, and deny justice for the family and friends of victims, for 2+ years after finding the incriminating envelope (a decent chunk of his remaining life on earth, given that he's now 72) before handing it over to LAPD; (2) the LAPD took 2+ years to arrest Durst after getting the letter and then coincidentally nabbed him the day of the finale of a show about his life; (3) the timeline presented by Jarecki and in the Times article is totally wrong for some reason. And that's even if you believe that they didn't find the audio until 2+ years after the interview, which as the Gawker article points out is an odd proposition.

When I thought it was 4 months or whatever I was fine with him putting the letter in a safe deposit box. But letting a killer walk free for 2+years? That's a long time.

 

[KarmaPolice]

So this guy walked around free for 4 months after that interview?

A lot longer than that. The interview took place years ago. The NY Times reported that "more than two years passed after the interview before the filmmakers found the audio."

Something about this whole thing (including the Times article) seemed incredibly fishy to me. Saw this Gawker article this morning, apparently I'm not the only one. Not only does their timeline not add up at all, but that would also mean that either: (1) Jarecki decided to let Durst walk around a free man, and deny justice for the family and friends of victims, for 2+ years after finding the incriminating envelope (a decent chunk of his remaining life on earth, given that he's now 72) before handing it over to LAPD; (2) the LAPD took 2+ years to arrest Durst after getting the letter and then coincidentally nabbed him the day of the finale of a show about his life; (3) the timeline presented by Jarecki and in the Times article is totally wrong for some reason. And that's even if you believe that they didn't find the audio until 2+ years after the interview, which as the Gawker article points out is an odd proposition.

When I thought it was 4 months or whatever I was fine with him putting the letter in a safe deposit box. But letting a killer walk free for 2+years? That's a long time.

i thought the initial interview was 2 years ago and the follow up for the last episode was several months ago. The filmmaker was on something this morning and said the editor heard the audio in the bathroom and that the police have had the audio for a few months now.

 

[simey]

So this guy walked around free for 4 months after that interview?

A lot longer than that. The interview took place years ago. The NY Times reported that "more than two years passed after the interview before the filmmakers found the audio."

Something about this whole thing (including the Times article) seemed incredibly fishy to me. Saw this Gawker article this morning, apparently I'm not the only one. Not only does their timeline not add up at all, but that would also mean that either: (1) Jarecki decided to let Durst walk around a free man, and deny justice for the family and friends of victims, for 2+ years after finding the incriminating envelope (a decent chunk of his remaining life on earth, given that he's now 72) before handing it over to LAPD; (2) the LAPD took 2+ years to arrest Durst after getting the letter and then coincidentally nabbed him the day of the finale of a show about his life; (3) the timeline presented by Jarecki and in the Times article is totally wrong for some reason. And that's even if you believe that they didn't find the audio until 2+ years after the interview, which as the Gawker article points out is an odd proposition.

When I thought it was 4 months or whatever I was fine with him putting the letter in a safe deposit box. But letting a killer walk free for 2+years? That's a long time.

As KP said, Jarecki said this morning they gave the police the recording many months ago. The editor caught it while listening to content they had left behind while he was finalizing the show. He said they (he and his crew) wanted Durst arrested ASAP, and they were amazed that it took so long. He said the authorities did not communicate with them much while going through their investigation.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Thanks, guys. That takes care of the explanation of the audio, which is reassuring, if true. Although the Gawker article points out that it would be impossible for "2+ years" to have passed since the interview if it really did take place after the 2013 arrest as the Times article (clearly written with the help of the filmmakers) suggested. Did the filmmaker address that today?

That also leaves the envelope, though, which to me is the far more troubling problem. How long was that in Jarecki's possession before it was given to LAPD? If we're talking a couple months and the timing of the arrest warrant was just a coincidence, I'm fine with that. If we're talking about years, I wouldn't be too pleased if I were a friend or relative of one of the victims.

 

[simey]

Thanks, guys. That takes care of the explanation of the audio, which is reassuring, if true. Although the Gawker article points out that it would be impossible for "2+ years" to have passed since the interview if it really did take place after the 2013 arrest as the Times article (clearly written with the help of the filmmakers) suggested. Did the filmmaker address that today?

That also leaves the envelope, though, which to me is the far more troubling problem. How long was that in Jarecki's possession before it was given to LAPD? If we're talking a couple months and the timing of the arrest warrant was just a coincidence, I'm fine with that. If we're talking about years, I wouldn't be too pleased if I were a friend or relative of one of the victims.

Here is what was addressed in the interview I saw this morning.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Thanks, guys. That takes care of the explanation of the audio, which is reassuring, if true. Although the Gawker article points out that it would be impossible for "2+ years" to have passed since the interview if it really did take place after the 2013 arrest as the Times article (clearly written with the help of the filmmakers) suggested. Did the filmmaker address that today?

That also leaves the envelope, though, which to me is the far more troubling problem. How long was that in Jarecki's possession before it was given to LAPD? If we're talking a couple months and the timing of the arrest warrant was just a coincidence, I'm fine with that. If we're talking about years, I wouldn't be too pleased if I were a friend or relative of one of the victims.

Here is what was addressed in the interview I saw this morning.

Thanks again- I'll watch during lunch.

Alan Sepinwall's reaction was basically the same as mine. Amazing, riveting television, which is really the most important thing from the standpoint of viewers with no stake in this story at all. And obviously it's better that someone unearthed this stuff than if Durst were still walking the streets. But there's still a lot of questions, stuff that could have been addressed after the bathroom audio clip (especially since the finale only ran 37 minutes).

 

[Limp Ditka]

The 37 minute run time was odd. You have that hammer to close with and no one is going to talk about another 15-20 minutes of filler

 

[comfortably numb]

Hopefully for Durst that juror who thinks he is just unlucky has moved to LA

 

[Quez]

It sounds like his brother & dad knew about the murder of his 1st wife & may have helped cover it up.

 

[SHIZNITTTT]

Easy defense - My client Bob was just going over the interview in his head and aloud. "what they think I killed them?" "fine I killed them all!!! is that what you want to hear?" He will get off again.

 

[whoknew]

Easy defense - My client Bob was just going over the interview in his head and aloud. "what they think I killed them?" "fine I killed them all!!! is that what you want to hear?" He will get off again.

Yea I think the envelopes are a lot more troublesome for him than the mutterings on tape.

 

[comfortably numb]

It sounds like his brother & dad knew about the murder of his 1st wife & may have helped cover it up.

I get this feeling as well.

Will be interesting how much digging will be done on this case.

 

[Joe Summer]

At one point when he's in the bathroom, he says to himself "I don't know what's in the house."

Are the police going to find more bodies inside this guy's house??

 

[BobbyLayne]

It sounds like his brother & dad knew about the murder of his 1st wife & may have helped cover it up.

I get this feeling as well.

Will be interesting how much digging will be done on this case.

I don't think so.

Seymour always suspected he was behind the killing, that's why he bypassed him over control over the Durst Organization and gave it to Doug in 1992. I think no one in the family had any contact with him over the last 23 years. Around 8-9 years ago through a court case they gave Robert like $65M to go away and never bother them again.

Doug's daughter lives across the block in a townhouse. They own most of the block (these are lesser known low rise properties, not the trophy buildings like 4 Times Square or One Bryant Park). Anyway, she sends her kids to public schools and most people in the neighborhood are acquainted with her. The only time I talked to her was one Sunday when she hosted a choir concert my daughter was in a few years ago. She works in a non-profit arm of the Durst Organization and married an Italian designer - they're frequently in the E.U.

Anyway, it's not like you ask someone you just met "Hey, how about that crazy uncle of yours..." but I've heard 2nd/3rd hand the family all think he is guilty and wished he would have been arrested & convicted. He's dead to them.

I know nothing of the Durst family even though this story has been out there forever. Besides the 2010 movie, 48 hours did a think in 2004, 60 Minutes ran a lengthy piece around 2001. Mother####er got away with murder and everyone knew it.

The neighbor/acquaintance is a nice a lady. I got nothing else but I think they're glad this might be moving towards a just conclusion.

 

[TobiasFunke]

It sounds like his brother & dad knew about the murder of his 1st wife & may have helped cover it up.

I get this feeling as well.

Will be interesting how much digging will be done on this case.

I don't think so.

Seymour always suspected he was behind the killing, that's why he bypassed him over control over the Durst Organization and gave it to Doug in 1992. I think no one in the family had any contact with him over the last 23 years. Around 8-9 years ago through a court case they gave Robert like $65M to go away and never bother them again.

Doug's daughter lives across the block in a townhouse. They own most of the block (these are lesser known low rise properties, not the trophy buildings like 4 Times Square or One Bryant Park). Anyway, she sends her kids to public schools and most people in the neighborhood are acquainted with her. The only time I talked to her was one Sunday when she hosted a choir concert my daughter was in a few years ago. She works in a non-profit arm of the Durst Organization and married an Italian designer - they're frequently in the E.U.

Anyway, it's not like you ask someone you just met "Hey, how about that crazy uncle of yours..." but I've heard 2nd/3rd hand the family all think he is guilty and wished he would have been arrested & convicted. He's dead to them.

I know nothing of the Durst family even though this story has been out there forever. Besides the 2010 movie, 48 hours did a think in 2004, 60 Minutes ran a lengthy piece around 2001. Mother####er got away with murder and everyone knew it.

The neighbor/acquaintance is a nice a lady. I got nothing else but I think they're glad this might be moving towards a just conclusion.

Obviously it's a one-sided portrayal, but IIRC the show presented reasons to suspect the Durst family was protecting Robert and maybe helping cover it up. I can't remember most of it, unfortunately. I do remember the show pointing out that the family offered no assistance or reward in any search for Kathleen. It's strange to not bother offering something like that if you're billionaires and a member of your family goes missing, obviously suggests that they knew she was dead. I think there was some other stuff as well. Anyone remember any of it?

 

[On The Rocks]

Easy defense - My client Bob was just going over the interview in his head and aloud. "what they think I killed them?" "fine I killed them all!!! is that what you want to hear?" He will get off again.

Yea I think the envelopes are a lot more troublesome for him than the mutterings on tape.

I agree....everyone keeps saying that he says "I killed them all", but that's not what he said. And who knows how his lawyers will spin it. I personally don't think the comments he made in the bathroom are enough to convict.

The hand writing is the most damning evidence and even that, couldn't they say the chain of possession of the evidence could come into question? How they spin that, I don't know, but they have gotten him off for hacking up a body,...so who knows.

 

[Limp Ditka]

Easy defense - My client Bob was just going over the interview in his head and aloud. "what they think I killed them?" "fine I killed them all!!! is that what you want to hear?" He will get off again.

Yea I think the envelopes are a lot more troublesome for him than the mutterings on tape.

I agree....everyone keeps saying that he says "I killed them all", but that's not what he said. And who knows how his lawyers will spin it. I personally don't think the comments he made in the bathroom are enough to convict.

The hand writing is the most damning evidence and even that, couldn't they say the chain of possession of the evidence could come into question? How they spin that, I don't know, but they have gotten him off for hacking up a body,...so who knows.

Never charged with hacking up the body, only murdering him.

 

[The Noid]

I like how the hand-writing evidence brought out the burping/gasping tick, to add to his repertoire.

 

[QuizGuy66]

Jarecki indicates the idea that Durst's mood might change from day to day (that he'd wanna talk one day and then perhaps when the day arrived wouldn't wanna talk). Perhaps his mood alternates between wanting to get caught and wanting to get away with it. Or perhaps he wants people to know he did it AND to STILL get away with it.

Those Texas defense lawyers - man that is amazing stuff (they seem quite practiced, like Durst, in practicing reciting rationales to themselves in order to be able to sleep).

-QG

 

[whoknew]

Jarecki indicates the idea that Durst's mood might change from day to day (that he'd wanna talk one day and then perhaps when the day arrived wouldn't wanna talk). Perhaps his mood alternates between wanting to get caught and wanting to get away with it. Or perhaps he wants people to know he did it AND to STILL get away with it.

Those Texas defense lawyers - man that is amazing stuff (they seem quite practiced, like Durst, in practicing reciting rationales to themselves in order to be able to sleep).

-QG

I am pretty confident that **** DeGuerin doesn't have any trouble sleeping at night. He's a great lawyer and if the prosecution can't win a slam dunk case - that's on them, not DeGuerin.

 

[comfortably numb]

It sounds like his brother & dad knew about the murder of his 1st wife & may have helped cover it up.

I get this feeling as well.Will be interesting how much digging will be done on this case.

I don't think so.

Seymour always suspected he was behind the killing, that's why he bypassed him over control over the Durst Organization and gave it to Doug in 1992. I think no one in the family had any contact with him over the last 23 years. Around 8-9 years ago through a court case they gave Robert like $65M to go away and never bother them again.

Doug's daughter lives across the block in a townhouse. They own most of the block (these are lesser known low rise properties, not the trophy buildings like 4 Times Square or One Bryant Park). Anyway, she sends her kids to public schools and most people in the neighborhood are acquainted with her. The only time I talked to her was one Sunday when she hosted a choir concert my daughter was in a few years ago. She works in a non-profit arm of the Durst Organization and married an Italian designer - they're frequently in the E.U.

Anyway, it's not like you ask someone you just met "Hey, how about that crazy uncle of yours..." but I've heard 2nd/3rd hand the family all think he is guilty and wished he would have been arrested & convicted. He's dead to them.

I know nothing of the Durst family even though this story has been out there forever. Besides the 2010 movie, 48 hours did a think in 2004, 60 Minutes ran a lengthy piece around 2001. Mother####er got away with murder and everyone knew it.

The neighbor/acquaintance is a nice a lady. I got nothing else but I think they're glad this might be moving towards a just conclusion.

Didn't the family hire the PI who found out that the doorman never saw kaltheen come into the building?

I'm not saying they hid evidence or were complicit but just got the vibe they know a lot more and it was in their best interest to keep this as a Bob Durst problem and not a Durst Inc problem.

 

[On The Rocks]

what are the chances he uses a multiple personality or schizophrenia insane defense?

 

[BobbyLayne]

It sounds like his brother & dad knew about the murder of his 1st wife & may have helped cover it up.

I get this feeling as well.Will be interesting how much digging will be done on this case.

I don't think so.

Seymour always suspected he was behind the killing, that's why he bypassed him over control over the Durst Organization and gave it to Doug in 1992. I think no one in the family had any contact with him over the last 23 years. Around 8-9 years ago through a court case they gave Robert like $65M to go away and never bother them again.

Doug's daughter lives across the block in a townhouse. They own most of the block (these are lesser known low rise properties, not the trophy buildings like 4 Times Square or One Bryant Park). Anyway, she sends her kids to public schools and most people in the neighborhood are acquainted with her. The only time I talked to her was one Sunday when she hosted a choir concert my daughter was in a few years ago. She works in a non-profit arm of the Durst Organization and married an Italian designer - they're frequently in the E.U.

Anyway, it's not like you ask someone you just met "Hey, how about that crazy uncle of yours..." but I've heard 2nd/3rd hand the family all think he is guilty and wished he would have been arrested & convicted. He's dead to them.

I know nothing of the Durst family even though this story has been out there forever. Besides the 2010 movie, 48 hours did a think in 2004, 60 Minutes ran a lengthy piece around 2001. Mother####er got away with murder and everyone knew it.

The neighbor/acquaintance is a nice a lady. I got nothing else but I think they're glad this might be moving towards a just conclusion.

Didn't the family hire the PI who found out that the doorman never saw kaltheen come into the building? I'm not saying they hid evidence or were complicit but just got the vibe they know a lot more and it was in their best interest to keep this as a Bob Durst problem and not a Durst Inc problem.

I don't pretend to understand how the very rich think. If it were my adult child I might feel like I had my answer, it's on the government to find theirs.

 

[Raider Nation]

Watched the first episode. They got their man.

Is there really any reason to continue watching this?

Yeah, nothing to see here.

 

[wikkidpissah]

what are the chances he uses a multiple personality or schizophrenia insane defense?

Pretty sure there's psychopathy of long standing there, but his acts show full culpability at every step. Their best chance is at his present competency, and that's about a 30/70 prop in the hands of the best defense money can buy.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Easy defense - My client Bob was just going over the interview in his head and aloud. "what they think I killed them?" "fine I killed them all!!! is that what you want to hear?" He will get off again.

Yea I think the envelopes are a lot more troublesome for him than the mutterings on tape.

He arrived at the house on Benedict Canyon to visit his friend for Christmas and found her shot dead. He was afraid that if he called police that they'd pin the crime on him due to motive, so he got out of there and then sent the anonymous letter so that she wouldn't lie there and decay.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

At one point when he's in the bathroom, he says to himself "I don't know what's in the house." Are the police going to find more bodies inside this guy's house??

Not 4 months later, unless Durst is a complete moron.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

I don't know all the details but I don't see how him mumbling to himself in the bathroom will hold up as a "confession" or "admission" or whatever.

 

[Capella]

@TheOnion: Robert Durst: "The second Im out, Ill shoot those moviemaking pricks." http://t.co/o7Ho8v1T8Fhttp://t.co/KVr3Eh9Kn9

 

[Quez]

It sounds like his brother & dad knew about the murder of his 1st wife & may have helped cover it up.

I get this feeling as well.Will be interesting how much digging will be done on this case.

I don't think so.

Seymour always suspected he was behind the killing, that's why he bypassed him over control over the Durst Organization and gave it to Doug in 1992. I think no one in the family had any contact with him over the last 23 years. Around 8-9 years ago through a court case they gave Robert like $65M to go away and never bother them again.

Doug's daughter lives across the block in a townhouse. They own most of the block (these are lesser known low rise properties, not the trophy buildings like 4 Times Square or One Bryant Park). Anyway, she sends her kids to public schools and most people in the neighborhood are acquainted with her. The only time I talked to her was one Sunday when she hosted a choir concert my daughter was in a few years ago. She works in a non-profit arm of the Durst Organization and married an Italian designer - they're frequently in the E.U.

Anyway, it's not like you ask someone you just met "Hey, how about that crazy uncle of yours..." but I've heard 2nd/3rd hand the family all think he is guilty and wished he would have been arrested & convicted. He's dead to them.

I know nothing of the Durst family even though this story has been out there forever. Besides the 2010 movie, 48 hours did a think in 2004, 60 Minutes ran a lengthy piece around 2001. Mother####er got away with murder and everyone knew it.

The neighbor/acquaintance is a nice a lady. I got nothing else but I think they're glad this might be moving towards a just conclusion.

Obviously it's a one-sided portrayal, but IIRC the show presented reasons to suspect the Durst family was protecting Robert and maybe helping cover it up. I can't remember most of it, unfortunately. I do remember the show pointing out that the family offered no assistance or reward in any search for Kathleen. It's strange to not bother offering something like that if you're billionaires and a member of your family goes missing, obviously suggests that they knew she was dead. I think there was some other stuff as well. Anyone remember any of it?

A family member of his 1st wife said the family was avoiding them, so he showed up at house. Once the brother heard the conversation turn towards the disappearance he said "this conversation is over" & escorted him out.

I think they may of had knowledge that he killed her.

 

[Joe Summer]

@TheOnion: Robert Durst: "The second Im out, Ill shoot those moviemaking pricks." http://t.co/o7Ho8v1T8Fhttp://t.co/KVr3Eh9Kn9

Maybe he didn't say "I killed them all", but rather "I'll kill them all" (referring to the filmmakers).

 

[IC FBGCav]

The best part was when Durst said he couldn't tell which one he didn't write.

 

[fruity pebbles]

The best part was when Durst said he couldn't tell which one he didn't write.

That was a great question

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

I don't know all the details but I don't see how him mumbling to himself in the bathroom will hold up as a "confession" or "admission" or whatever.

Do you mean you think it will be inadmissible or that Durst will be able to explain it away? If he signed a consent to be recorded, I'm not sure how it would be excluded. I suppose I'd argue that Durst had an expectation that he'd only be hot while recording, but he was on notice that this wasn't the case.

Durst would pretty much have to testify in order to explain it away, and I would say that under normal circumstances, most defense attorneys probably wouldn't want that in this case (as opposed to in Galveston where his testimony was the only way to build a prima facie self defense defense).

To the extent that people are arguing that this case will be no stronger than (and indeed weaker than) the case against him in Galveston, I agree with that. But people are convicted on circumstantial evidence all the time. I wouldn't count on the guy getting another jury as suggestible as the one in Galveston.

 

[None_More_Black]

Easy defense - My client Bob was just going over the interview in his head and aloud. "what they think I killed them?" "fine I killed them all!!! is that what you want to hear?" He will get off again.

Yea I think the envelopes are a lot more troublesome for him than the mutterings on tape.

He arrived at the house on Benedict Canyon to visit his friend for Christmas and found her shot dead. He was afraid that if he called police that they'd pin the crime on him due to motive, so he got out of there and then sent the anonymous letter so that she wouldn't lie there and decay.

Yeah I think that will be the defense. Might be able to suppress it all together as others were saying. I don't think the audio in the documentary will be a problem. The motive is weak. Unless someone comes forward I doubt they convict him.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Los Angeles prosecutors on Monday charged New York real estate heir and TV documentary subject Robert Durst with murder in the 2000 death of his friend, Susan Berman.

Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey said that Durst, the subject of an HBO documentary who was taken into custody in New Orleans on Saturday by FBI agents,, is charged with one count of first degree murder. The charge under California law carries the "special circumstances of murder of a witness and lying in wait,'' and makes Durst eligible for the death penalty if convicted, Lacey said.

Also may be facing gun charges in NOLA.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Watched the first episode. They got their man.

Is there really any reason to continue watching this?

Yeah, nothing to see here.

ool

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Durst flees to familiar refuge

NEW ORLEANS — Not for the first time in his life, Robert A. Durst had left his home and sought to disappear. And not for the first time, he went to New Orleans. In the past, he posed as a mute woman. This time he checked into a JW Marriott under an alias, Everette Ward. He had a gun and possibly marijuana. Mr. Durst had spent nearly half his life suspected of murder — first of his wife, then of one of his closest friends and finally of an elderly neighbor in Texas.

Even before HBO broadcast the dramatic finale on Sunday of a documentary film about him and the murders, in which Mr. Durst seemed to admit his role in the killings, he told friends and associates that he was worried he would be arrested. Mr. Durst knew that he had taken a gamble in participating in the film, against the wishes of his lawyers, but it seemed a chance to tell his side of the story.


As the documentary drew to its close, he told friends he believed they were coming for him. They did on Saturday night in New Orleans as state police officers and federal agents arrested him at the hotel.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

Easy defense - My client Bob was just going over the interview in his head and aloud. "what they think I killed them?" "fine I killed them all!!! is that what you want to hear?" He will get off again.

Yea I think the envelopes are a lot more troublesome for him than the mutterings on tape.

He arrived at the house on Benedict Canyon to visit his friend for Christmas and found her shot dead. He was afraid that if he called police that they'd pin the crime on him due to motive, so he got out of there and then sent the anonymous letter so that she wouldn't lie there and decay.

Yeah I think that will be the defense. Might be able to suppress it all together as others were saying. I don't think the audio in the documentary will be a problem. The motive is weak. Unless someone comes forward I doubt they convict him.

Scoob/FBG lawyers, you think this will be the play or will they say he didn't write the cadaver note? Wife and I were arguing this last night.