Posted on 11/12/2003 9:25:19 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
Spending two years in jail and months on trial for murder could have had a number of effects on Robert Durst, but his attorneys said it made him a better person. Defense attorney Michael Ramsey called Tuesday’s verdict of not guilty a “wonderful outcome” and said Durst had “come a long way.” “When I first met him, he had been 40 years under the influence of one drug or another,” Ramsey said. County Criminal District Attorney Kurt Sistrunk said he still saw Durst as a dangerous criminal. “Mr. Durst is not going to be invited to my house for any reason at all,” Sistrunk told a group of reporters Tuesday morning, after a jury found the New York millionaire not guilty of murder. The verdict ended nearly four days of jury deliberations, six weeks of testimony and more than two years of investigation. The jury notified State District Court Judge Susan Criss that members had reached a verdict about 9:15 a.m., and she read the verdict to a packed courtroom 45 minutes later. Durst’s mouth hung open briefly as the verdict was read, and he looked down. Seconds later, members of his defense team took turns embracing him. Durst had been charged with murder in the death of his isle neighbor, 71-year-old Morris Black, whose dismembered remains were found floating in Galveston Bay on Sept. 30, 2001. Black’s head has never been found. Durst admitted dismembering the body, but said Black’s death was an accident. He testified weeks ago that on Sept. 28, 2001, he opened his door to find Black inside his apartment. Black had a gun of Durst’s and began to point it at him when Durst grabbed the barrel, Durst said. Black fell back in an ensuing struggle, and the gun went off, killing him, Durst said. Prosecutors charged that Durst carefully planned Black’s death and concealed his crime. During the trial, more than one courtroom observer called the legal combination of Dick DeGuerin, Chip Lewis and Michael Ramsey a “defense dream team,” but DeGuerin said the verdict reflected his client’s innocence, not the amount of money he spent in his own defense. “I didn’t hear from any member of the jury that Bob Durst bought his way to freedom,” he said at a press conference after the verdict. “That just didn’t happen.” Minutes later at the same gathering, County Criminal District Attorney Kurt Sistrunk paused before answering a question about his reaction to the verdict. “‘Dismayed’ may be an accurate word. ‘Disappointed’ may be an accurate word,” Sistrunk said. However, he also said he respected the jury’s verdict, as well as the work Galveston detectives Cody Cazalas and Gary Jones put into the case, from the day Black’s remains were discovered to the day Durst was nabbed in Pennsylvania after six weeks as a fugitive. “I can’t say enough about their commitment when this defendant was on the run,” Sistrunk said. “If not for the hard work Cody Cazalas put into this case, there never would have been a charge against this defendant — and Sgt. Gary Jones also.” Neither detective appeared interested in discussing the case Tuesday. Cazalas walked through the courthouse lobby and out of the courthouse without a word, while Jones answered chasing television reporters with “I have to get back to work” as he walked out of the courthouse. DeGuerin admitted the defense had problems, with Durst dismembering Black’s body and fleeing the state after making bond in the hours that followed his Oct. 9, 2001, arrest. Throughout the case, defense attorneys had said bond jumping and abuse of a corpse were separate criminal charges to be tried another day, while prosecutors said they were indicators Durst was trying to conceal wrongdoing and escape its consequences. Attorney Lewis said the defense strongly considered resting without producing any evidence of its own, after the state’s case, believing the prosecution had not met its burden of proof. Only one thing stood in the way of that plan — Durst himself. “Mr. Durst wanted to tell his story,” Lewis said. “He insisted. I didn’t necessarily agree. I thought we had the case already won, but it turned out well.” DeGuerin said telling his version to jurors was important to Durst. “I’m sure if we had said, ‘No, don’t do it,’ he would not have taken the stand, but Bob has wanted to tell the jurors what happened all along,” DeGuerin said. Durst said he had come to Galveston in November 2000 to escape publicity surrounding the reopening of the investigation into the 1982 disappearance of his first wife, Kathleen. The Westchester County district attorney behind the investigation, Jeanine Pirro, was a villain in the defense account of the case. “If Ms. Pirro had kept her mouth shut, none of this would have happened,” Ramsey said in closing arguments. Ellen Strauss, a Connecticut attorney who was a friend of Kathleen Durst, has been vocal for years about her belief that Durst had something to do with his wife’s disappearance. Strauss said she was ill over the verdict and said she hoped the New York disappearance investigation or the Los Angeles investigation into the December 2000 murder of Durst’s friend Susan Berman would yield results soon. “Now is the time for Jeanine Pirro to put her money where her mouth is and quit blowing smoke up people’s noses,” she said. “This is her opportunity to put the lie to defense counsel’s words blaming her. I intend to keep on fighting to bring this man to justice. …” Durst was still in jail Tuesday. He was being held without bond in a pair of bond-jumping cases stemming from his failure to appear at a pair of court hearings in the murder case. Durst became a fugitive Oct. 16, 2001, when he failed to appear at an arraignment, and was wanted until his Nov. 30, 2001, arrest near Allentown, Pa. Bond jumping is a charge that carries a possible prison term of two to 10 years, as well as a fine of up to $10,000. That charge will likely be the only remaining one for Durst to face. Sistrunk said his office would not charge Durst with abuse of a corpse, since that charge was a class A misdemeanor. Even if Durst were convicted and sentenced to the maximum penalty under the law, he would have time served for the year in jail, and the $4,000 maximum fine is less than half the amount Durst pulled out of the bank regularly in the months before Black’s death.
Because if you're "going back and forth", it means that you have doubts as to guilt, perhaps even reasonable doubt. I'd be 100% comfortable voting not guilty if I had reasonable doubt as well, as that is what the law requires.
Of course they're not going to say that. This jury was so stupid, they couldn't spell "cat" even if you spotted them the "c" and "t"!
My "favorite" juror was the one who said that Durst "was not the only crazy person in Galveston." No kidding -- it looks like there are at least 12 others!
The question was "Did the State prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it?" Entirely different question. Like OJ, this is just a total failure of prosecution. Looks like the Jury did their job.
Hey, it could happen (but only if you get tried in Galveston).
BTW, that little gem one juror spouted about there being no case without a head was a lulu, eh?
Where did this idiot think the guy's head was supposed to be? In the courtroom? As evidence?
Oh, please. The state had an admitted killer. What else did they need?
The state did not have to prove a thing.
Durst admitted he shot the man. Even the dismemberment -- heinous as it was -- was immaterial to the case.
I would love to see the directions the judge gave to the jury as she sent them out to deliberate. That oughta be good for a laugh or two.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.