a documentary about the crime of a suspected serial killer. There are very few horror or bloody shots or pictures in the film, but it is advanced, semi-objective and semi-subjectively revealing the truth is heart-warming. shock.
1. The Plot
documentary records the story of a serial murderer. The particularity of the protagonist's identity makes what happened to him and everything he did more compelling, and aroused public opinion discussion.
The protagonist of the story is Robert Durst, the eldest son of Durst, a wealthy family business in New York, USA. He became a suspect in three cases:
the disappearance of his wife Kathleen McCormack Durst; the murder of his close friend Susan Berman; and the murder and dismemberment of his neighbor Morris Black.
As viewers, on the basis of not being able to grasp all the materials and all the truth of the case, we cannot completely believe that Robert Durst killed them in terms of the materials recorded and collected in the documentary and the viewpoints it leads, although there is a strong tendency to believe that It should be what he did.
Even in the last episode of the documentary, when the director put two addresses with similar handwriting in front of him (one was the misspelled address on the envelope that Durst sent to Susan Berman, and the other was sent by the murderer to the police with "CADAVER" The same misspelled address on the envelope where the corpse was located), Durst, who could not identify or even found a reasonable excuse, went to the bathroom and whispered to himself "You are caught...What the hell did I do?..." He was right, you was wrong...Kill them all, of course.
Two, Durst
This is a particularly complicated person. The cold-faced, seemingly ordinary or even handsome and elegant white-haired old man is completely unable to associate him with a devil who "killed" his wife, "killed" his best friend, "killed" and mutilated his neighbor. Maybe the real demon is just the face of an ordinary person.
Before the age of seven, his childhood was full of "happy, happy, happy" as he said. But one night, when he was taken to the window by his father, he saw his mother standing on the top of the building, and he beckoned to her. Later, his mother committed suicide and fell from a building. No one knows the reason for her suicide. Behind the seemingly glitz of a wealthy family, can anyone know what a woman faced. Durst attended the funeral of his mother and saw his mother buried in a box. He struggled painfully. In the interview, he said, "Never bring a child to the funeral." It was a disaster. Since then, Durst has started conflicts with his father and family, rebellious, withdrawn, and solitary. Perhaps it was witnessing the death of his mother with his own eyes and the lack of family warmth that led to the defects in his personality.
Using the words of an editor of the New York Times in an interview, I think it sums up his psychology very well. "His whole life, he's felt slighted, and underappreciated, and smarter than other people, and he wants to let this across. He doesn't feel like justice has been done, even as people peel away and want little to do with him. He's stuck in a rut that began when he was a child."
After marriage, he kept arguing with his wife, and was even filed for divorce; in the family business, although he was an heir, a millionaire, and had inexhaustible money, he has always been in a position that is not valued. He feels that he has been Abandoned, he lacks love, longs for love, and hopes to be noticed. From the documentary, Durst himself offered to accept an interview, even if it faces great risks, it is also remarkable. Perhaps this is also the case. When his wife filed for a divorce, he "killed" (although there is currently no evidence in this case, there is no trace of the wife or even the corpse, and it is impossible to prove whether the wife has disappeared by herself or was killed by Durst) , And then because of possible knowledge of Berman was re-examined, Kathy's case was facing re-investigation, Durst "killed" Berman.
Durst is cruel, cold, clever, I think that you can escape the sanctions, in the interview he had exposed even a sly smile indistinct, but in fact he has been stuck in a rut that began when he was a child.
In Behind the real interview footage, how did he survive so many years, by luck? Guilt? The habitual self-talking often reveals the truest psychology of his heart. He keeps suggesting himself by talking to himself, repeatedly emphasizing "I did not knowingly purposefully lie." and then saying "Nobody tells the truth."
Three, Others
The documentary also interviewed other people, including police officers, detectives, prosecutors, lawyers defending Durst, relatives of Durst interviewed, family and friends of Kathy lost, and Berman's son who said he was dancing with devil, and so on. Among them was the police detective who was deeply impressed. He blushed and choked and said: "As a homicide investigator, you work for God, because the victim's not there to tell his history. You're there to represent the victim. You're there to tell his story. You're doing that for God. "
But in Morris Black's murder, and finally under the defense strategy of a powerful lawyer team hired by Durst heavily, the jury finally sentenced Durst "Not Guity." According to In the documentary, the defense lawyer's main defense strategies and methods are as follows:
1. Regarding the reason for Durst's absconding behavior, the defense strategy used by the lawyer is to make the District Attorney Jeanine Pirro into an ambitious, heavily makeup, and politically ambitious woman in front of the jury. By restarting Kathy’s case to achieve their own political goals, people are easily influenced by their own preconceived emotions rather than professional judgments, and defense lawyers have used this psychology to interpret Durst’s absconding to Texas as being subject to female prosecutors. Officer Pirro's persecution.
2. Shift the focus. One is to limit the content of the prosecutor's complaint to the act of murder, rather than the dismemberment of the corpse afterwards. The other is to interpret "murder" as "self-defense" and shift the burden of proof. The very important testimony here comes from a policeman "It's the prosecution's burden, once self-defense is raised, to disprove self-defense." That is to say, once the defense claims that the murder act prosecuted by the prosecution is actually the defendant's self-defense. -defense legitimate defense behavior, then the prosecution shall bear the burden of proof that its behavior is not legitimate defense, but in this case, because of the lack of key evidence-that is, the mutilated head of the victim Morris, only from the wounds on the existing corpse It was impossible to judge that it was caused by Durst, leaving Durst room for defense with justified defense.
For those who find Durst guilty, the actions of Durst’s lawyers are tantamount to letting go of a Devil. Just as in the Simpson case back then, almost when the public found Simpson guilty, Simpson’s gold lawyers used "doubtful crimes". The principle of "never nothing" questioned the evidence. In the end, the jury found Simpson not guilty. In the Durst case, history seemed to repeat itself.
Four, Documentary
Regarding the documentary itself, there are many theories about how the documentary writer should remain objective, restrained, and calm, and whether he should intervene in the incident or the people recorded. In fact, as a creator, it is difficult to remain absolutely calm and objective. Just as Andrew Jarecki, the director of the documentary, believed that Durst was innocent at first, and even liked this person a little, until he found two letters with similar handwriting, his point of view Changes began to take place. In the last episode, when I asked Durst about two similar handwritings, I could see that his hands were shaking because of tension; the producer’s subjective attitude can also be seen everywhere in the documentary, especially in the last episode, where the production was recorded in detail. The team interviewed Durst for the second time on the preparation process and psychological activities; in addition, the creator of the documentary has already intervened in the case, and even played a part of the role of the prosecutor, discovered new evidence, verified the two handwritings, and even recorded it. Durst "confessed" when he whispered. The documentary itself triggered widespread public follow-up discussions, and even indirectly promoted the relaunch of the Berman case. Its role is no longer as simple as an objective recorder.
View more about The Jinx: The Life and Deaths of Robert Durst reviews
