The Durst case was not one needing better prosecutors. The State team that tried the case was very competent. But, even good lawyers can only do so much with the facts they have.
I personally know every member of the defense team and can tell you they are outstanding lawyers. DeGuerrin and Ramsey are among a handful of the best criminal trial lawyers in the State if not the country. Robert Hirschhorn, now in Dallas but originally from Galveston where the case was tried, is in my view the best jury consultant in the country. He also assisted in picking the jury in the Will Kennedy Smith trial in Florida in 1991. When folks need the best, they hire Robert. Without question, Durst had one of the best dream teams ever assembled. In my view, it far surpasses the OJ team.
As an aside, and in the interest of full disclosure, and without getting into too much detail, I represented Mr. Durst in relation to matters in Galveston arising out of his bail bond forfeiture (not the criminal bail jumping charges) so I am at least somewhat biased.
While the jury reached the right result, it is always important to remember that we never see anything close to the full picture based on media reports. The jury, on the other hand, had the benefit of seeing the actual evidence and not just the media sound bites.
One final comment about all criminal trials -- and not specifically about this trial. Just because a jury finds someone guilty does not mean they are guilty. Similarly, just because a jury finds someone not guilty does not mean that they are not guilty.
Troy
Those who shoot from the hip usually end up just shooting themselves.
Plan the grub and grub the plan.
Where is the party tonight? Who is bringng the drinks?
