but it seems to me the prosecutors should have included the lesser charge of manslaughter.
In hindsight, there is no question that they might have been better off to have done so. Then again, based on listening to about 30 minutes of the jurors' comments about the case, it might not have made any difference. Of course, had they done so and had the jury found it to be involuntary manslaughter (recklessly causing the death), they (and many others) would have second guessed whether they should have just stuck with murder.
In this case, both sides independently made a strategic decision not to request submission of any lessor charges.
For what it is worth, Durst still faces the bond jumping charges, but it is unlikely now that a jury would give him the maximum (10 years) for skipping out for two months on a case for which he was acquited. The really smart strategic move, again in hindsight, would have been for the State to try the bond jumping case first (without question the easier of the two cases) while the murder case was still pending. They would have likely gotten better results than they will get now since he has now been acquited.
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?
