It's amazing how people continue to get themselves in trouble by failure to obey elementary safety rules. One such rule is that firearms, microphones, and naked babies should be handled as if loaded at all times.
The microphone failures tend to make the news most often. Remember President Obama telling the puppet President of Russia that he would have "more flexibility" in his second term, when he didn't have to worry about those pesky voters any more?
California millionaire Robert Durst, long a suspect in two murders, was confronted with tough questioning during an interview for a documentary after foolishly ignoring his lawyer's advice not to give the interview. Melanie Gracie West has this story in the WSJ.
The microphone failures tend to make the news most often. Remember President Obama telling the puppet President of Russia that he would have "more flexibility" in his second term, when he didn't have to worry about those pesky voters any more?
California millionaire Robert Durst, long a suspect in two murders, was confronted with tough questioning during an interview for a documentary after foolishly ignoring his lawyer's advice not to give the interview. Melanie Gracie West has this story in the WSJ.
In Sunday's episode, after filming had stopped, but before Mr. Durst's microphone had been turned off, he was recorded saying in private: "What the hell did I do? Killed them all, of course."The WSJ story begins,
Robert A. Durst was charged with first-degree murder on Monday as legal experts debated whether the alleged confession of the real-estate millionaire and TV documentary subject would be admissible in court.Really? What debate? What grounds for exclusion?
Several experts said that the timing of the arrest to the airing of the final episode raised suspicions. They also said there is no reason that the seeming admission of guilt would be inadmissible in court, nor that there would be some expectation of privacy in a bathroom, where Mr. Durst made the comments.In other words, there really isn't any debate about admissibility.
There might be some question about the ambiguity of Mr. Durst's statements, said Sherry Colb, a law professor at Cornell University, but "admission was apparently voluntary, was not coerced by law enforcement and was not the product of improper or non-Mirandized custodial interrogation."
James A. Cohen, a Fordham University professor of law, watched Sunday's episode of the documentary and said that Mr. Durst's final statements were "absolutely admissible."
Leave a comment