[Balog]

I wanna be a crazy old guy when I grow up.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=2&u=/ap/20031111/ap_on_re_us/fugitive_heir

[BryanP]

I wanna be a crazy old guy when I grow up.

Now now, he's not crazy, he's eccentric. The news story even said so. Remember, he's wealthy.

[Dr.Rob]

So we have a cross dressing drug smuggler who admits he (well didn't really admit to self defense) who chopped up a guy with an axe.

Call me crazy, but where there is smoke there is fire. This guy is s suspect in TWO other homicides.
'
I'm betting the jury didn't get to hear about his previous "eccentricities".

Shooting someone illegally in your apt... likely a good cause for self defense.

Rallying around a guy who chopped up his neighbor... bad for our cause.

Just my 2 cents you'll see this case used as an example by the antis.

[TarpleyG]

If he is such a millionaire, why is he living in a low-rent aprtment building??? Inquiring minds want to know. I cannot believe they let this kook off the hook.

GT

[Archie]

because the prosecutor went only for a murder charge. Murder signifies a previous intent to kill someone without legal grounds. It implies planning and a motive (however screwy). The phrase "with malice aforethought" comes to mind. Had the prosecutor charged Durst with manslaughter, the jury would have convicted. There is no question who was there and who is dead and who is alive. There is a great question of "was malice involved?" on Durst's part.

Durst seems to be a screwball. In other times or places, his family would put him in "the home" or some other safe place.

Please don't anyone think I'm on this guy's side. He may well be a serial killer. However, the other allegations do not prove his guilt. He's a screwball, and most likely all his acquaintences are screwballs, like his missing wife and the other woman who were shot. The late Mr. Black seems to have been identified as a screwball. Not only them, but their friends too. Why is it so improbable that another of their screwy friends did those deeds?

The problem is, the prosecution could not prove it's charge of murder. That's the way our justice system works, the accused gets the benefit of any doubt.

[Balog]

That's the way our justice system works, the accused gets the benefit of any doubt.

Unless you're accused of violating drug or tax (ie NFA) laws.

[El Tejon]

:eek:

Archie, no lesser included instruction?!?! All or nothing cowboy rubbish?!?! Really?:eek:

[agricola]

sometimes juries do the craziest things!

[RustyHammer]

... sort of cuts ya up, doesn't it? :rolleyes:

[Archie]

It's either in the linked article or another I was reading. Prosecutor and defense both agreed to a murder only charge. The defense attorney really outsmarted the prosecution on that move.

Had they charged manslaughter or littering, they would have convicted. I guess it sometimes pays to bet the farm.

[El Tejon]

Archie, I am beyond words. Big, silly hat off to my tilecrawler brother to managed that.

In all my years of prosecuting, I always asked for the lesser included (most of the time they were already filed). I find this amazing.