Ken H
Second Unit
LA County Deputy DA Ethan Millius continues the prosecution argument.
Returns to the Morris Black murder case.
How do you know if a story is a lie? Durst is not a pathological liar. He lies because he has a motivation.
Four ways to know if a story is a lie
1) Does the story make sense?
2) Is it supported or refuted by independent evidence?
3) Has the person telling the story repeatedly lied?
4) Motivation to lie or tell the truth?
Durst lies because he is trying to hide from the fact he committed 3 murders.
He told the truth about the relationship with Kathie, in The Jinx to Anthony Jarecki, how he emotionally and physically abused her, because the facts won’t let him get away with the lies.
Durst admits he lies under oath. He admits he lied to the Galveston jury. He admits he lied about several things in this trial, upon further questioning says five lies.
Asked if would tell the court he didn’t kill Black, Durst says no. Because the facts back up he did kill Black.
There is tons of evidence. It’s just a question of if you look at everything and you understand its importance.
For example, the story about how he learned about Susan Berman’s death as told in the Morris Black trial, and how the story was completely different when he told it in this trial.
Millius uses the undercover police officer character in the Quentin Tarantino film Reservoir Dogs as the example of how to make his story believable, by practicing over and over. The story has to be the same every time. Durst did just that with his testimony for the Morris Black trial. Recorded phone calls show Durst asking friends to evaluate his testimony, is it good enough to be believable? He reviewed his testimony with a hired jury consultant and used his advice. All to help him get acquitted. Practice the story over and over.
This is how Durst got acquitted for the Black murder.
But, Millius gives numerous examples of the complete differences between what Durst testified in the Morris Black trial and what he’s testified in this trial about the murder. The stories Durst tells is are totally different.
Arguments in a trial are like an Egyptian pyramid, the base of everything supports the rest of the structure. Durst’s pyramid is inverted and it’s all based on believing Durst, which based on the known facts of the case, and the way Durst lies, is impossible. Once you understand that Durst's testimony is the only evidence that supports his stories, then you know the stories he tells are not true.
Durst was known to be in fear of the new investigation of Kathie’s death. Both the defense and prosecution know this and have stated it in court. The difference is the prosecution knows why Durst was afraid; because he knew he killed her.
Millius finishes this portion of the prosecution closing argument. LA County Deputy DA Habib Balian will resume after a break.
Returns to the Morris Black murder case.
How do you know if a story is a lie? Durst is not a pathological liar. He lies because he has a motivation.
Four ways to know if a story is a lie
1) Does the story make sense?
2) Is it supported or refuted by independent evidence?
3) Has the person telling the story repeatedly lied?
4) Motivation to lie or tell the truth?
Durst lies because he is trying to hide from the fact he committed 3 murders.
He told the truth about the relationship with Kathie, in The Jinx to Anthony Jarecki, how he emotionally and physically abused her, because the facts won’t let him get away with the lies.
Durst admits he lies under oath. He admits he lied to the Galveston jury. He admits he lied about several things in this trial, upon further questioning says five lies.
Asked if would tell the court he didn’t kill Black, Durst says no. Because the facts back up he did kill Black.
There is tons of evidence. It’s just a question of if you look at everything and you understand its importance.
For example, the story about how he learned about Susan Berman’s death as told in the Morris Black trial, and how the story was completely different when he told it in this trial.
Millius uses the undercover police officer character in the Quentin Tarantino film Reservoir Dogs as the example of how to make his story believable, by practicing over and over. The story has to be the same every time. Durst did just that with his testimony for the Morris Black trial. Recorded phone calls show Durst asking friends to evaluate his testimony, is it good enough to be believable? He reviewed his testimony with a hired jury consultant and used his advice. All to help him get acquitted. Practice the story over and over.
This is how Durst got acquitted for the Black murder.
But, Millius gives numerous examples of the complete differences between what Durst testified in the Morris Black trial and what he’s testified in this trial about the murder. The stories Durst tells is are totally different.
Arguments in a trial are like an Egyptian pyramid, the base of everything supports the rest of the structure. Durst’s pyramid is inverted and it’s all based on believing Durst, which based on the known facts of the case, and the way Durst lies, is impossible. Once you understand that Durst's testimony is the only evidence that supports his stories, then you know the stories he tells are not true.
Durst was known to be in fear of the new investigation of Kathie’s death. Both the defense and prosecution know this and have stated it in court. The difference is the prosecution knows why Durst was afraid; because he knew he killed her.
Millius finishes this portion of the prosecution closing argument. LA County Deputy DA Habib Balian will resume after a break.