Robert Durst, the eccentric real estate heir, became the subject of national intrigue not just because of the crimes he was accused of—but because of how his behavior, courtroom strategies, and media exposure shaped one of the most bizarre legal sagas in recent memory.

The Bianchi Law Group, led by former head county prosecutor Robert Bianchi, has provided expert commentary on Durst’s legal proceedings across numerous national media outlets, including Fox News and Law & Crime. Here’s a breakdown of the key legal developments and insights we’ve shared over the years.

The Accusations Against Durst

Durst was accused of the 2000 murder of his close friend Susan Berman, who was shot execution-style in her Hollywood home. He had long been suspected in multiple deaths, including that of his first wife, Kathleen Durst, who disappeared in 1982 and was never found. In a separate case, Durst admitted to killing and dismembering a man in Texas but was acquitted on the grounds of self-defense.

The “Hot Mic” Confession and the Power of Vanity
Durst participated in a documentary that revisited these murders, unknowingly providing damning evidence during filming. In what has become one of the most famous unscripted moments in true crime history, Durst, still wearing a live microphone, went into a bathroom and muttered what sounded like a confession: “What the hell did I do? Killed them all, of course.”

As Bob Bianchi observed on Fox News, this was a catastrophic misstep. Durst had violated the “Golden Rule” in criminal defense: keep your mouth shut. What had been a cold case with limited prosecutable evidence suddenly had a statement that placed Durst at the center of suspicion.

Prosecutorial Missteps in the Louisiana Case

Durst faced two major cases—one in California for murder, and one in Louisiana for gun and drug charges. Strategically, prosecutors should have prioritized the Louisiana case, which was far easier to win and could have resulted in a de facto life sentence given Durst’s age.

Unfortunately, the prosecution made several key errors:

Warrantless Search: Officers entered Durst’s hotel room without a warrant, potentially rendering key evidence inadmissible.

Subpoena Disregard: Prosecutors instructed police to ignore valid subpoenas for a probable cause hearing, angering the judge and risking contempt.

Grand Jury vs. Probable Cause: The prosecution chose a probable cause hearing—giving the defense early access to witnesses—rather than a simple grand jury indictment, which could have streamlined the case.

These mistakes show how crucial strategy is in trial law. As we often remind the attorneys we train, winning a case isn’t just about making arrests—it’s about proving your case properly in court.

Trial Coverage and Credibility Battles

Durst’s courtroom behavior became another focal point. The prosecution cross-examined him for over six days, which raised concerns about whether they were losing juror attention or giving the defense too much room to exploit inconsistencies. However, as the judge noted, the prolonged questioning ultimately damaged Durst’s credibility—a significant win for the state.

In another segment with Sanford Rubenstein and later with Kary Antholis and Gigi Gonzalez, Robert Bianchi analyzed how both the prosecutor’s time budget and strategy had to be carefully balanced.

The Civil Case and Fifth Amendment Traps

In addition to the criminal cases, Durst was hit with a civil suit from his late wife’s family for emotional damages caused by being unable to give her a proper burial. These types of lawsuits create legal tension: a defendant still under criminal investigation has a Fifth Amendment right to remain silent—but exercising that right in civil court often results in losing the case by default.

This is a textbook example of the kind of legal danger many defendants don’t fully appreciate. Speaking in one venue can incriminate you in another.

Durst’s Legacy: Legal Lessons from a Twisted Case

From warrant violations to cross-examination strategy, the Durst case was a masterclass in how a criminal case can pivot on both tactical brilliance and preventable mistakes.

“The best trial lawyers don’t just argue law—they maneuver the entire progression of a case to increase their odds of success,” says Robert Bianchi. “Durst’s defense team understood that. The prosecution learned it the hard way.”

As New Jersey criminal defense attorneys and former prosecutors, we continually lecture and train attorneys on trial strategy—and the Durst case serves as a high-profile example of both what to do and what to avoid.

Watch Bob Bianchi Discuss the Case

Final Thoughts

While Robert Durst passed away in 2022, the legal proceedings surrounding his life and actions leave a lasting footprint in criminal law. From ill-advised interviews to prosecutorial missteps and strategic court maneuvers, this case remains a study in the complexities of criminal litigation.