• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

The Jinx on HBO

DeaconBrews said:
isn't it an admission by party opponent?
Click to expand...

The issue would be he had an expectation of privacy while pissing in the bathroom.

And in turn whether the filmmakers were government agents for purposes of 4th Amendment analysis. Not my area of expertise, but I'm leaning towards no, it will be admissible.
 
Last edited:
How bizarre was that yawn/burp/groan thing Durst did, covering his whole face with his hands, when confronted with the envelope? It was like he was about to barf.

That trial in LA is going to be so fun to watch. For Durst's sake, I hope he finds another dumbass juror like that one interviewed last night. Oops.
 
wakelaw13 said:
The issue would be he had an expectation of privacy while pissing in the bathroom.

And in turn whether the filmmakers were government agents for purposes of 4th Amendment analysis. Not my area of expertise, but I'm leaning towards no, it will be admissible.
Click to expand...

Hard to believe he made the mistake of talking to himself into a hot mike again after doing the same earlier in the show. How did this idiot get away with 3 murders? Fascinating show.

This was posted yesterday afternoon, so I guess it was a reference to the arrest.

 
qcdeac said:
Hard to believe he made the mistake of talking to himself into a hot mike again after doing the same earlier in the show. How did this idiot get away with 3 murders? Fascinating show.

This was posted yesterday afternoon, so I guess it was a reference to the arrest.

Click to expand...

This guy wanted to be caught. He agrees to do hours and hours of interviews and then he makes the same microphone mistake after he was warned about it by his attorney the first time? Amazing
 
Assuming for a second that his bathroom confession isn't admissible, he's just going to say he went to visit Susan and found her like that and was too scared to call the police because of his past history and sent the letter, right?
 
Fuck Your Couch said:
Assuming for a second that his bathroom confession isn't admissible, he's just going to say he went to visit Susan and found her like that and was too scared to call the police because of his past history and sent the letter, right?
Click to expand...
Sure, but they'll have a motive. He lied about not being there. They'll have him in LA. His phone was oddly switched off around that time. They have the letter and handwriting analysis from all of the other documents. They have him saying it's a letter "only the killer would have written". The use of the word cadaver which they can link to his wife being in med school. There was also other evidence alluded to that hasn't been disclosed. He's done IMO.

I assume there will be some sort of civil filing at some point.
 
Yeah, but it's kind of like Galveston when they caught him basically red handed and he claimed self-defense and being scared. I doubt it would work again but he'll say he's guilty of lying about being in LA because he was scared and no one would believe him with his history.
 
Fuck Your Couch said:
Assuming for a second that his bathroom confession isn't admissible, he's just going to say he went to visit Susan and found her like that and was too scared to call the police because of his past history and sent the letter, right?
Click to expand...

They still can't definitively put him in LA. The only thing that puts him in LA is if a jury believes, based on handwriting expert testimony, that he wrote both letters.

pourdeac said:
Sure, but they'll have a motive. He lied about not being there. They'll have him in LA. His phone was oddly switched off around that time. They have the letter and handwriting analysis from all of the other documents. They have him saying it's a letter "only the killer would have written". The use of the word cadaver which they can link to his wife being in med school. There was also other evidence alluded to that hasn't been disclosed. He's done IMO.

I assume there will be some sort of civil filing at some point.
Click to expand...

Who is going to file a civil suit? He already paid off her 'kid'.

If you think the letter thing is a slam dunk, it's not. There is a HUGE chain of custody issue with that second letter. Additionally, he will definitely have experts that say that you can't conclude that the same person wrote both levels. The jury will choose who to believe.
 
Last edited:
Fuck Your Couch said:
Yeah, but it's kind of like Galveston when they caught him basically red handed and he claimed self-defense and being scared. I doubt it would work again but he'll say he's guilty of lying about being in LA because he was scared and no one would believe him with his history.
Click to expand...
That worked without a motive and with a victim who apparently wasn't sympathetic. And without a head, they couldn't prove execution so an accident was a believable scenario. His comment linking the letter to the killer and it being risky to send? I don't know how he'd get around that. It has "I'm guilty" written all over it.
 
I'm assuming that handwriting experts are going to say that the two letters were definitely written by the same person, and Durst's defense is going to work around that fact rather than try to fight an uphill battle to dispute it.
 
Just finished binge watching after seeing all the buzz on the Interwebz this morning. Figured it best to go ahead and watch it before everything gets spoiled. I doubt lottery winners are giddier about their good fortune than Jarecki must have been to see how things unfolded, all the way up to the perfectly timed arrest in NOLA. That series was so good I'm now planning to watch what looks like a cruddy movie - All Good Things.
 
TheTwinAndreBen said:
If you think the letter thing is a slam dunk, it's not. There is a HUGE chain of custody issue with that second letter. Additionally, he will definitely have experts that say that you can't conclude that the same person wrote both levels. The jury will choose who to believe.
Click to expand...
Sure...experts will weigh in...but the writing looks to the eye to be spot on. Most of the analysis was done on other documents, and not the second letter. The misspelling is there so it's more than just handwriting style. The second letter came from someone who had been very sympathetic to him too so there is no "he's out to get me" motive there.

I assume anyone connected to any of the 3 murders could now file a civil suit.
 
You can pay an expert to say whatever you want. The defense will definitely have an expert witness that says the letters are inconclusive as to a common author.

The biggest problem with the letters, and its a huge one, is chain of custody.
 
DeacHead said:
That series was so good I'm now planning to watch what looks like a cruddy movie - All Good Things.
Click to expand...

Yep. So, Ryan Gosling played Robert Durst?

They did a brilliant job laying out the LA murder over the 6 episodes. Initially, that was the one that I didn't think he had any part of, but they slowly released facts building the case that he did it: him being in Cali, his use of the word cadaver and then of course the old letter.
 
TheTwinAndreBen said:
You can pay an expert to say whatever you want. The defense will definitely have an expert witness that says the letters are inconclusive as to a common author.

The biggest problem with the letters, and its a huge one, is chain of custody.
Click to expand...

I could definitely see reasonable doubt with his funds and access to the best attorneys. I could even see them saying that he was mocking Andrew's questions with his "What the hell did I do? Killed them of course." mumblings.
 
qcdeac said:
Hard to believe he made the mistake of talking to himself into a hot mike again after doing the same earlier in the show. How did this idiot get away with 3 murders? Fascinating show.

This was posted yesterday afternoon, so I guess it was a reference to the arrest.

Click to expand...

I honestly don't know which Durst I would rather see removed from the general population.
 
Thankfully Fred and Limp Bizkit is pretty much removed already.
 
Chain of custody might be an issue, but I can't believe they sat on that cadaver note for 15 years with so many other samples of his handwriting out there. The letter N alone nails him to that letter. His N's are totally unique. He could deny penning the address on that letter, but he didn't deny it when initially confronted about it, and I think handwriting samples could tie him to it as much as they'll tie him to the cadaver letter.

The totality of the evidence is where he is fucked, I think, and it will be interesting to see what is admissible from all of it. I mean, think back to the convo with his wife where it was clearly implied that he was going to kill his brother at one point, then he learns where his brother lives in NYC and goes back there outside of the film shoot and scopes it out. The guy is methodical. The funny thing is he isn't particularly competent, but he manages to still be free after all these years.
 
wakelaw13 said:
The issue would be he had an expectation of privacy while pissing in the bathroom.

And in turn whether the filmmakers were government agents for purposes of 4th Amendment analysis. Not my area of expertise, but I'm leaning towards no, it will be admissible.
Click to expand...

How could they possibly be considered government actors? They were making a movie, not conducting an investigation on behalf of the government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top