#1 reason is because the murder he is on trial for was to cover evidence of the first murder. How can you make the comments, you are making, when you don't know the basic fact of the case?
@@midnighttennessee8904 Because I was hoping to have a civil discussion with someone who could it explain it to me and you are obviously not that person. The prosecutor I think is overreaching and is acting like a Stalinist stooge!! Durst is a monster but still deserves due process. Please do not reply because I am not interested in speaking with you any longer!!
@@midnighttennessee8904 Also, if it is true that he was covering for the first murder of which he was acquitted than the most he he should be charged with is obstruction of justice or something similar.
@@lordrobert12 I'm not sure why I added that last bit on my comment. I'm sorry for that, it was rude and uncalled for. It wouldn't just be obstruction because...he told his best friend about murdering his wife and then when he thought she (best friend) was going to go to the police and tell them years later, he killed her as well. So yes it was obstruction but it was also murder. Murder kinda beats out obstruction. Listen this guy got away with killing a couple people and he is thought to have killed two more women, not even mentioned. Also the judge that resided over the case where he killed his neighbor was almost killed by him as well. Durst had to serve a tiny bit of time for lying to the police for that whole neighbor mess. He got out early, on parole, for good behavior and was suppose to stay in new York. They found him in a mall following the judge. He had a stun gun on himself and in the car he had a gun and like duct tape and something else I can't remember. So although yes they allowed the other murders in to prove it was to cover up the previous murder, it was also to prove that this is something he does. If ome does three murders you are considered a serial killer, he just got off on them so courts couldn't call him that. They didn't bring in a lot of other stuff he did, like the judge thing, because it was determined to be too prejudicial. The man really is very lucky he made it to the age he was, before going to prison. I hope that explains a little more for you. Again, I'm sorry for my behavior and words, I wish I knew why I would say that. It was rude and I apologize.
In order to introduce evidence related to his arrest in Pennsylvania, they need to have her on the stand stating what happened. Remember, it's not the questions but the answers which are evidence and any exhibits they introduce.
95 percent of the evidence against him is irrelevant and prejudicial!! If the prosecutor believes that he committed a crime than he needs to present only evidence that relates to his present crime!!
@@justsayin1786 Hopefully the jurors are listening though I won't speculate as to their thoughts. As a TH-cam viewer, I'd find it more interesting to watch if I could "read" their faces.
It looks like Robert durst got away with it for 21 years starting look like he's going to get away with it forever just because he's an old man now it doesn't mean he was not guilty of it
There are two other cases, that I know very little about, that suggest he might be responsible for their 'disappearances', as well. Of course, that's can go both ways but geesh I hope these people can figure out 3x, is a bit too much of a weird coincidence. Especially when the prosection shows the jury his unedited statements from the jinx.
a top New Zealand defense attorney Hung him self ..left note and said please god forgive me and the victims of the dogs i represented ... done it in a alley way behind the court house ,,true story son
Even at OJ’s Las Vegas trial the prosecution was prohibited from mentioning his Los Angeles trial? Why is it different here?
#1 reason is because the murder he is on trial for was to cover evidence of the first murder. How can you make the comments, you are making, when you don't know the basic fact of the case?
@@midnighttennessee8904 Because I was hoping to have a civil discussion with someone who could it explain it to me and you are obviously not that person. The prosecutor I think is overreaching and is acting like a Stalinist stooge!! Durst is a monster but still deserves due process. Please do not reply because I am not interested in speaking with you any longer!!
@@midnighttennessee8904 Also, if it is true that he was covering for the first murder of which he was acquitted than the most he he should be charged with is obstruction of justice or something similar.
Las Vegas is not located in California different laws.
@@lordrobert12 I'm not sure why I added that last bit on my comment. I'm sorry for that, it was rude and uncalled for. It wouldn't just be obstruction because...he told his best friend about murdering his wife and then when he thought she (best friend) was going to go to the police and tell them years later, he killed her as well. So yes it was obstruction but it was also murder. Murder kinda beats out obstruction. Listen this guy got away with killing a couple people and he is thought to have killed two more women, not even mentioned. Also the judge that resided over the case where he killed his neighbor was almost killed by him as well. Durst had to serve a tiny bit of time for lying to the police for that whole neighbor mess. He got out early, on parole, for good behavior and was suppose to stay in new York. They found him in a mall following the judge. He had a stun gun on himself and in the car he had a gun and like duct tape and something else I can't remember. So although yes they allowed the other murders in to prove it was to cover up the previous murder, it was also to prove that this is something he does. If ome does three murders you are considered a serial killer, he just got off on them so courts couldn't call him that. They didn't bring in a lot of other stuff he did, like the judge thing, because it was determined to be too prejudicial. The man really is very lucky he made it to the age he was, before going to prison. I hope that explains a little more for you. Again, I'm sorry for my behavior and words, I wish I knew why I would say that. It was rude and I apologize.
If they do not convict this guy this time, we should all loose faith in our system. He was gotten away with murder twice already. Geez.
*lose faith *He has gotten away....
Maybe a few more times actually
His mother was probably his first
cameras in the bathroom??? wtf
In order to introduce evidence related to his arrest in Pennsylvania, they need to have her on the stand stating what happened. Remember, it's not the questions but the answers which are evidence and any exhibits they introduce.
Where's Cesar Sayoc?
95 percent of the evidence against him is irrelevant and prejudicial!! If the prosecutor believes that he committed a crime than he needs to present only evidence that relates to his present crime!!
That's not the way it works. Obviously!
*...then he needs to...
I don't know why they're making life so hard with these masks when she's behind plexiglass and it's on her sides as well
Paranoia.
It would be much easier to get interested in this case if we could see the faces of those testifying.
@@justsayin1786 Hopefully the jurors are listening though I won't speculate as to their thoughts. As a TH-cam viewer, I'd find it more interesting to watch if I could "read" their faces.
@@bordeauxhouse Well you tube viewers aren't really a priority.
In the government there is a competition to see who can be more stupid than the other!!!
I wish the sound people would ask the witnesses to stop making noise on the surface in front of them. The thumping is distracting.
I agree he is very noisy thumb.
It looks like Robert durst got away with it for 21 years starting look like he's going to get away with it forever just because he's an old man now it doesn't mean he was not guilty of it
He’s a psychopath!
There are two other cases, that I know very little about, that suggest he might be responsible for their 'disappearances', as well. Of course, that's can go both ways but geesh I hope these people can figure out 3x, is a bit too much of a weird coincidence. Especially when the prosection shows the jury his unedited statements from the jinx.
He was going to get Gilbete and maybe Doug...was gonna kill again
A MILLIONARE.. THAT STEALS A SANDWICH PAPER.. AND BAND AID.. HE SHOULD DO TRIPLE THE TIME....
Omg ...really ?? You all have masks on........and are behind plexiglass....and your complaining about her mask sliding down a little???? Omg ppl 🤣
Current laws in California requires masks indoors
a top New Zealand defense attorney Hung him self ..left note and said please god forgive me and the victims of the dogs i represented ... done it in a alley way behind the court house ,,true story son