No, the prosecution is arguing their case to the jury that Kathie was murdered by her husband. Mr Chesnoff's reference to her disappearance as murder was within the context of the prosecution's position only.
,950 people watching this right now why don't all the people that appreciate law and crime for the great job they do by hitting the thumbs up or likes button
This fits Robert perfectly: John 8:44. Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
@@infinite8382 it's funny how empty atheists get so emotional when confronted with the holy scripture! Who do you think you are to tell others what they can and cannot say you sad hypocrit!!
@@stevetrivago who cares are you saying he shouldn't be convicted?The court & jury aren't God either but they will convict him. I doubt you even are a Christian, given your pathetic argument!
@@omgthekitty1676 Looks like YOU are the one being emotional! LoL. The bible is a lot fo things, but holy aint one of them. I've read it cover to cover and its trash. It seems that your own words apply to you, "Who do you think you are to tell others what they can and cannot say you sad hypocrit!!" Jesus would be so proud of you. LMAO
Chesnoff is right, besides durst dismembering his neighbor, putting him in trash bags like garbage, and throwing him in the bay, shooting his best friend in the back of the head, and making sure his wife was never seen or heard from again, besides that, he's a great guy!!!
If you are running with people connected to the mob that would not be unexpected. Susan was reported to be writing a book about the mob because she was desperate for money because she had been scammed out of a fortune. So that does cast shadows.
He’s allowed to explain his rulings outside the presence of the jury. In fact, it’s preferable in terms of what an appeal court is using to review his rulings.
Lewin loves to consistently point out how he makes these long-winded arguments "outside the jury presence". Are we really to believe that NONE of those jurors are going home and watching what was said that day when they were out of the room? # doubtful 😆
He could have made his arguments shorter but I get that you get emotional seing that Durst's millions have prevented him fromrotting in jail since years so far. Durst will finally get what he deserved a long time ago. A *guilty as charged* verdict!
@@omgthekitty1676 I'm not emotional here. 😂 (I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion.) I think Durst is most likely guilty but I also think Lewin is a complete buffoon. His co-counsel (Habib Balian) should have been doing the talking throughout this WHOLE case. He's a thousand times better than this whiney, self-important man-child. And by the way, my comment was about the jury going home and being able to watch arguments that happen when they aren't there, NOT about whether Durst is guilty. If you can't respond to the content of the comment, please don't waste people's time. (Maybe go comment with irrelevant things on one of the other echo chambers here. 😉) Cheers.
It IS important that he makes these arguments outside of the jury presence, because doing it in front of them would be misconduct. The reason he’s angry and passionate about DeGuerin’s behavior is because it IS beyond the pale. DeGuerin has over 50 years of experience, so he is well aware he’s behaving unethically. Balian is a fine lawyer. But he lacks passion, and he doesn’t have Lewin’s incredible grasp of case law. Lewin wins because he’s careful, dedicated, and GOOD at his job. Frankly, there’s no other prosecutor I have ever seen that I would trust more to prosecute someone who committed a crime against me. You may not like his style, but it works because of the passion and skill.
You know def is in trouble when they focus on constitutional rights & the presumption of innocence during closing. ( Certainly, these are core principles of our legal system) But when the facts are against you, you have to argue the law.
Not true. Defense counsel always always always has to hammer on the law. If the prosecution has the evidence and met their burden, they should welcome defense counsel’s focus on the law. Constitutional rights and presumption of innocence are not loopholes. They are the foundation of our justice system.
Yeah, I thought that was a low blow--and objectionable, as he is asserting it as a fact when there isn't any evidence to that effect in front of the jury. No need to cheat that way unless you're out of good ammunition.
@@kyletevis And I thought I heard Lewin say today that the prosecution and the defense entered a stip regarding Jarecki, and that's why he didn't need to testify. As for opposing the subpoena, the witness can refuse to come to trial and be subject to arrest and jail for contempt of court, or he can come and refuse to testify under the 5th amendment, but there's no other option like filing an opposition to subpoena, or something like that. To me it's laughable that a smart guy like Durst would agree to say false yet incriminating things about himself merely to promote a movie that portrays him as a murderer, unless he is a murderer. You just told the people what they wanted to hear? Nah.
The reason that the prosecution chose not to call Jarecki was because the defense was going to try to argue that they’d forfeited journalistic privilege, which would have extended the trial much longer. And the defense STIPULATED what Jarecki would say. So Lewin was absolutely right that calling him was not worth it. Also? The defense could have called him as a hostile witness. They didn’t. Just like they chose not to call witnesses that they *claim* would’ve placed Kathie in New York. Because that would not go well for the defense.
Some kind of a monster? Absolutely he was/is. I can’t believe he said that about Durst. Yes, the prosecutor was correct to do that. He tried to minimize hacking up a human being. Geesh….
@@christinajacob6871 dismembering a person should result in a life sentence (or one might argue - death sentence) This is beyond the pale... to think otherwise is heinous. He has never denied he cut that man up. Pure evil. No remorse
I don’t like the beginning of the defense closing argument. With jurors, you have to get to the point. Doing a 15-20 minute “thank you” montage was way to long. I’ve seen less “thank you”at the Oscars than this close.
Susan was reported to be writing a book about the mob because she was desperate for money because she had been scammed out of a fortune. So that does cast shadows.
@@bunnielebowski2007 her then boyfriend conned her into giving him all of her money, as well as putting her HOUSE up as collateral, in his efforts to make a musical about the Dreyfus Affair. It was an absurd idea, but she was very loyal and wanted to support him. Once her money ran out, he left. And left her to raise his kids.
@@ritatinken5867 I agree. Evidence does not have to be concrete. All the lies and running and more lies about where he was and wasn’t. There’s plenty of circumstantial evidence to convict. And perfectly capable. He wasn’t old then.
@@lizziem6640 he may be old but remember his response when Lewin asked him a couple of weeks ago @ his running & hiding in Galveston (killing & dismembering his buddy there) Durst’s responded with a smirk & laugh, “well I kinda liked it down there”. Omg!!! That alone shows you his demented, evil character! He not only killed, dismembered & got off in Texas but had NO REMORSE…HE WAS LAUGHING!!!!
He certainly seems to enjoy the sound of his own voice! He's behaving as lawyers generally do though - they throw their weight around. But Lawyers should demonstrate respect and stand when addressing the court, but Lewin is quite sloppy in that regard.
@@lyndahalcrow8550 it’s clear that Lewin has health issues. I don’t know exactly what, but he wears hearing aids, he has had to wear a catheter for extended periods of time, and he was granted permission to remove his jacket at points in the trial. This is clearly an accommodation being made for him. As for liking to hear himself - he is an *incredible* attorney. There’s a reason he wins all of his cases. 1) he doesn’t charge someone unless he knows they’re guilty, 2) he knows every possible detail of the case, and 3) he vociferously fights for the victim’s rights. If I needed a prosecutor, he’s the very first one I would want.
@@TheWifeRottenRomance Yes clearly he is an outstanding trial lawyer; an experienced one. I am not sure there are many other Judges who would allow any lawyer to shout when addressing the court for as long as he was befor the Judge pulled him up on it.
@@lyndahalcrow8550 Windham is very low key. He wasn’t actually upset at Lewin’s anger, just wanted him to calm down. If you listen to things the judge has said, it’s clear he has great respect for Lewin. And I think it’s also clear that Windham is fed up with the defense at best skirting the edge of ethics. The reason the judge hasn’t shut Lewin down as frequently as he maybe could? Because Lewin is saying what the judge wishes he could.
Chesnoff says no matter how many times he gets up there, he get butterflies, has trouble sleeping and gets worried -uh yeah that's natural when you know you don't have truth on your side.
How pathetic his appeal to the jury about having represented people from "all walks of life"! Yeah right, I doubt a janitor could have afforded such a defense & his friend "Bobby" 100% made sure that the cash flow to the lawyers was never interrupted throughout the multiple arrests of his filthy rich Scrooge *friend*! It is sad to hear that a Billionaire who could have lived out his life comfortably without ever moving a finger chose to live on the dark side, hide in dingy apartments, armed to his teeth, even resorting to live as a mute woman, when everyone described that "woman" to clearly be a man with poor, cheap judgement on his disguise. Bob is guilty as charged, he should have received the death penalty years ago as he murdered 3 people in cold blood, was on his way to eliminate even more witnesses when the Scrooge Billionaire got himself caught stealing a sandwich and bandaids. That in itself says everything there is to know about Bob Durst. May he get crappy medical care and sit behind bars until his cancer ate him up!
Chesnoff and Deguerin have represented many “janitors” and people from poor socio-economic backgrounds. Those are the people that make up the majority of a defense attorney’s cases. Multi- Millionaire accused murderer clients are few and far between (if ever in a defense attorney’s career).
Hmm why is the prosecutor so het up??? If he is confident in his case he wouldnt be going bananas at the judge!!! Galveston he was cleared ........so it shouldnt even be talked about here. 12 jurors found him not guilty and thats why he was a free man. Im not for one minute defending Bob ......its just the prosecutor is acting like a spoilt brat. Hes worried about a hung jury?? Is he hoping for a promotion if he wins!!
@@nicolew2367 I certainly appreciate the content. But I'm an attorney, I was in trial all day today, and he drives me bonkers. Says the same things over and over and over. After the court rules, he says his positions over again. Before the court rules, he says his positions three times. Totally maddening.
Can lawyers never learn when they pound the podium it’s annoying AF.
Nice touch reading Gerry Spence’s words…..Gerry Spence is one of my all time favourite American lawyers!!!
I liked Matlock the most.
Freudian slip chesnoff called kathies disappearance a murder at around the 1 hour mark
1.01
Nice catch.
No, the prosecution is arguing their case to the jury that Kathie was murdered by her husband. Mr Chesnoff's reference to her disappearance as murder was within the context of the prosecution's position only.
,950 people watching this right now why don't all the people that appreciate law and crime for the great job they do by hitting the thumbs up or likes button
This fits Robert perfectly: John 8:44.
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
@@stevetrivago speak for yourself bucko. I don't believe in such primitive nonsense that is so very easily debunked.
Perfect vers
@@infinite8382 it's funny how empty atheists get so emotional when confronted with the holy scripture! Who do you think you are to tell others what they can and cannot say you sad hypocrit!!
@@stevetrivago who cares are you saying he shouldn't be convicted?The court & jury aren't God either but they will convict him. I doubt you even are a Christian, given your pathetic argument!
@@omgthekitty1676 Looks like YOU are the one being emotional! LoL. The bible is a lot fo things, but holy aint one of them. I've read it cover to cover and its trash. It seems that your own words apply to you, "Who do you think you are to tell others what they can and cannot say you sad hypocrit!!" Jesus would be so proud of you. LMAO
Chesnoff is right, besides durst dismembering his neighbor, putting him in trash bags like garbage, and throwing him in the bay, shooting his best friend in the back of the head, and making sure his wife was never seen or heard from again, besides that, he's a great guy!!!
What are the chances of three people in your immediate orbit being obliterated? Glove fits.
If you are running with people connected to the mob that would not be unexpected. Susan was reported to be writing a book about the mob because she was desperate for money because she had been scammed out of a fortune. So that does cast shadows.
I was thinking that very same thing myself. “Coincidence” ??? I don’t think so!
@@gwens5093 it’s people like you that end up getting killed by people like him….for your lack of discretion 😢
Absolutely 💯👍🏻
Terrible Defense Closing Argument: assuring our constitutional system is protected. You must not let biases affect your judgment
The judge should keep his feelings to himself..who cares what he thinks.its up to the jury..it's a trial by jury not a judge
Jury is not hearing his opinions, he gives them while they are out of the room.
He’s allowed to explain his rulings outside the presence of the jury. In fact, it’s preferable in terms of what an appeal court is using to review his rulings.
An hour and twelve minutes to get to the dang reason were all hear watching. Why don't they time stamp these videos.
Agree what in the actual F REALLY??
I love the whole court process
Honestly
I
Learn something new
Mr. Chesnoff kept trying to object during the trial and was told many times that Mr. DeGueren was the lead and it was his job to object.
Dreadful defence closing ..
The defense closing is literally putting me to sleep. Sooo boring!😪
@@christinayoder2029 i dont watch it, i cant stand being lied to :/
He's so nervous
Lewin loves to consistently point out how he makes these long-winded arguments "outside the jury presence". Are we really to believe that NONE of those jurors are going home and watching what was said that day when they were out of the room? # doubtful 😆
He could have made his arguments shorter but I get that you get emotional seing that Durst's millions have prevented him fromrotting in jail since years so far. Durst will finally get what he deserved a long time ago. A *guilty as charged* verdict!
@@omgthekitty1676 I'm not emotional here. 😂 (I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion.) I think Durst is most likely guilty but I also think Lewin is a complete buffoon. His co-counsel (Habib Balian) should have been doing the talking throughout this WHOLE case. He's a thousand times better than this whiney, self-important man-child.
And by the way, my comment was about the jury going home and being able to watch arguments that happen when they aren't there, NOT about whether Durst is guilty. If you can't respond to the content of the comment, please don't waste people's time. (Maybe go comment with irrelevant things on one of the other echo chambers here. 😉)
Cheers.
It IS important that he makes these arguments outside of the jury presence, because doing it in front of them would be misconduct. The reason he’s angry and passionate about DeGuerin’s behavior is because it IS beyond the pale. DeGuerin has over 50 years of experience, so he is well aware he’s behaving unethically.
Balian is a fine lawyer. But he lacks passion, and he doesn’t have Lewin’s incredible grasp of case law. Lewin wins because he’s careful, dedicated, and GOOD at his job. Frankly, there’s no other prosecutor I have ever seen that I would trust more to prosecute someone who committed a crime against me.
You may not like his style, but it works because of the passion and skill.
You know def is in trouble when they focus on constitutional rights & the presumption of innocence during closing. ( Certainly, these are core principles of our legal system) But when the facts are against you, you have to argue the law.
Not true. Defense counsel always always always has to hammer on the law. If the prosecution has the evidence and met their burden, they should welcome defense counsel’s focus on the law. Constitutional rights and presumption of innocence are not loopholes. They are the foundation of our justice system.
Jerecky didn’t have the courage to go to court? Hummmm. I don’t think that’s the case.
Yes we had a whole session about Jarecki. He is misstating several things that witnesses said as well.
Yeah, I thought that was a low blow--and objectionable, as he is asserting it as a fact when there isn't any evidence to that effect in front of the jury. No need to cheat that way unless you're out of good ammunition.
@@kyletevis And I thought I heard Lewin say today that the prosecution and the defense entered a stip regarding Jarecki, and that's why he didn't need to testify.
As for opposing the subpoena, the witness can refuse to come to trial and be subject to arrest and jail for contempt of court, or he can come and refuse to testify under the 5th amendment, but there's no other option like filing an opposition to subpoena, or something like that.
To me it's laughable that a smart guy like Durst would agree to say false yet incriminating things about himself merely to promote a movie that portrays him as a murderer, unless he is a murderer. You just told the people what they wanted to hear? Nah.
The reason that the prosecution chose not to call Jarecki was because the defense was going to try to argue that they’d forfeited journalistic privilege, which would have extended the trial much longer. And the defense STIPULATED what Jarecki would say. So Lewin was absolutely right that calling him was not worth it.
Also? The defense could have called him as a hostile witness. They didn’t. Just like they chose not to call witnesses that they *claim* would’ve placed Kathie in New York. Because that would not go well for the defense.
Some kind of a monster? Absolutely he was/is. I can’t believe he said that about Durst. Yes, the prosecutor was correct to do that. He tried to minimize hacking up a human being. Geesh….
Pam please hide your naivety
It's astonishing how the defence has tried to normalise dismemberment. Dismemberment takes a special kind of evil.
@@christinajacob6871 please hide your leftard/libtardism
@@christinajacob6871 dismembering a person should result in a life sentence (or one might argue - death sentence) This is beyond the pale... to think otherwise is heinous.
He has never denied he cut that man up. Pure evil. No remorse
I found that playback speed 1.25 was perfect for this part of the defense’s opening statement. Nothing juicy yet.
1.5
@@tempestnz1 I tried that it was a little too fast for me lol. Only because I wanna hear the emotion in the voice and be able to get all of it
Lol i think the jury dedicated their time to the case ........not their lives!!! 😂😂😂
5 months is hardly a lifetime 😂😂😂
John is Brillant, simply brillant
I don’t like the beginning of the defense closing argument. With jurors, you have to get to the point. Doing a 15-20 minute “thank you” montage was way to long. I’ve seen less “thank you”at the Oscars than this close.
No evidence no case...the absence of evidence is evidence!
What? No evidence? Are you being sarcastic or did your med refill not go through?
What’s the use, it should have been done years ago, sorry for the family and friends, maybe he’ll come clean, who knows
come clean, no that's highly unlikely unfortunately, since bob has no conscience
To prejudice you and claim durst is dangerous. He is.
Susan was reported to be writing a book about the mob because she was desperate for money because she had been scammed out of a fortune. So that does cast shadows.
@@gwens5093 how was she scammed? I’m not familiar with her story.
@@bunnielebowski2007 her then boyfriend conned her into giving him all of her money, as well as putting her HOUSE up as collateral, in his efforts to make a musical about the Dreyfus Affair. It was an absurd idea, but she was very loyal and wanted to support him. Once her money ran out, he left. And left her to raise his kids.
They cannot convict him because there is not enough evidence
Says who?
Are you watching the same trial Cynthia??
@@ritatinken5867 yes
@@ritatinken5867 I agree. Evidence does not have to be concrete.
All the lies and running and more lies about where he was and wasn’t. There’s plenty of circumstantial evidence to convict. And perfectly capable. He wasn’t old then.
@@lizziem6640 he may be old but remember his response when Lewin asked him a couple of weeks ago @ his running & hiding in Galveston (killing & dismembering his buddy there) Durst’s responded with a smirk & laugh, “well I kinda liked it down there”. Omg!!! That alone shows you his demented, evil character! He not only killed, dismembered & got off in Texas but had NO REMORSE…HE WAS LAUGHING!!!!
Start at about 22.00
Lewin is probably the most annoying attorney on earth. Just loves to hear himself speak.
He certainly seems to enjoy the sound of his own voice! He's behaving as lawyers generally do though - they throw their weight around. But Lawyers should demonstrate respect and stand when addressing the court, but Lewin is quite sloppy in that regard.
@@lyndahalcrow8550 it’s clear that Lewin has health issues. I don’t know exactly what, but he wears hearing aids, he has had to wear a catheter for extended periods of time, and he was granted permission to remove his jacket at points in the trial.
This is clearly an accommodation being made for him.
As for liking to hear himself - he is an *incredible* attorney. There’s a reason he wins all of his cases. 1) he doesn’t charge someone unless he knows they’re guilty, 2) he knows every possible detail of the case, and 3) he vociferously fights for the victim’s rights.
If I needed a prosecutor, he’s the very first one I would want.
@@TheWifeRottenRomance Yes clearly he is an outstanding trial lawyer; an experienced one. I am not sure there are many other Judges who would allow any lawyer to shout when addressing the court for as long as he was befor the Judge pulled him up on it.
@@lyndahalcrow8550 Windham is very low key. He wasn’t actually upset at Lewin’s anger, just wanted him to calm down. If you listen to things the judge has said, it’s clear he has great respect for Lewin. And I think it’s also clear that Windham is fed up with the defense at best skirting the edge of ethics. The reason the judge hasn’t shut Lewin down as frequently as he maybe could? Because Lewin is saying what the judge wishes he could.
Chesnoff says no matter how many times he gets up there, he get butterflies, has trouble sleeping and gets worried -uh yeah that's natural when you know you don't have truth on your side.
How pathetic his appeal to the jury about having represented people from "all walks of life"!
Yeah right, I doubt a janitor could have afforded such a defense & his friend "Bobby" 100% made sure that the cash flow to the lawyers was never interrupted throughout the multiple arrests of his filthy rich Scrooge *friend*! It is sad to hear that a Billionaire who could have lived out his life comfortably without ever moving a finger chose to live on the dark side, hide in dingy apartments, armed to his teeth, even resorting to live as a mute woman, when everyone described that "woman" to clearly be a man with poor, cheap judgement on his disguise. Bob is guilty as charged, he should have received the death penalty years ago as he murdered 3 people in cold blood, was on his way to eliminate even more witnesses when the Scrooge Billionaire got himself caught stealing a sandwich and bandaids. That in itself says everything there is to know about Bob Durst. May he get crappy medical care and sit behind bars until his cancer ate him up!
Chesnoff and Deguerin have represented many “janitors” and people from poor socio-economic backgrounds. Those are the people that make up the majority of a defense attorney’s cases. Multi- Millionaire accused murderer clients are few and far between (if ever in a defense attorney’s career).
Ummm
Hmm why is the prosecutor so het up???
If he is confident in his case he wouldnt be going bananas at the judge!!!
Galveston he was cleared ........so it shouldnt even be talked about here. 12 jurors found him not guilty and thats why he was a free man.
Im not for one minute defending Bob ......its just the prosecutor is acting like a spoilt brat.
Hes worried about a hung jury??
Is he hoping for a promotion if he wins!!
Shut up
Huh???
Lewin is totally insufferable. Loves to hear himself talk. Another prosecutor would have done this trial on half the time.
@@SrulDog I still think I’d prefer Lewin and the extra time
@@nicolew2367 I certainly appreciate the content. But I'm an attorney, I was in trial all day today, and he drives me bonkers. Says the same things over and over and over. After the court rules, he says his positions over again. Before the court rules, he says his positions three times. Totally maddening.