MovieChat Forums > The Jinx: The Life and Deaths of Robert Durst (2015) Discussion > Do you believe that it really did take m...

Do you believe that it really did take months to hear the "confession"?

posted 10 years ago by padzok
6 replies | jump to latest

The makers have been very vague about when they first heard the alleged confession.

Arguably, if they did think it was a confession, then they were required to hand it over to the authorities straight away.

Of course, if they did not think it was a confession, and just thought it was an old man rambling, then they were not obliged to call the police. However, that interpretation would not provide such an explosive end to their 6 part series.

Dates are vague, but it seems like the interview took place in 2012, and the details of the bathroom conversation were supplied to police (maybe) in 2014 after they were found by chance during editing.

But do we believe that they would not have deliberately checked what Durst might have said to himself?

In the first interview, there is at least one occasion where they left the video running (and mike on) and his lawyer had to run up to him to warn him to stop talking.

Even more tellingly, in the scripted drama All Good Things, the writers draw particular attention to the character talking to himself, making it an important feature of two scenes and a minor feature of a couple of others.

So they definitely knew that he had a tendency to talk to himself?

They'd been working on the story for a decade.

According to The Jinx, they intended this to be a crunch point interview.

Is it more plausible that they checked straight away whether he spoke to himself, or is it more plausible that they waited 2 years?

[–] lordjames-1 10 years ago

I believe they discovered it immediately and this explanation absolves them of potential crimes they could be charged with for withholding it.

[–] paranoja 10 years ago

I think it's certainly possible they didn't discover it for months considering how much they must've taped to have six one hour episodes. Of course, it might just be them covering their own backs too as to not seem too cynical on sitting on it, but it isn't impossible.

[–] cogs 10 years ago

I work in television and I would believe an audio operator would have been listening at the time. I know of no instance in which an audio operator would shut down their own equipment (ie, listening through headphones) before retrieving a remote mic from an interviewee.

But tonight we should have fun, not dwell on Scott Baio.

[–] baz678 9 years ago

Bobby found in Jarecki his match. Another master manipulator.

[–] k_street 9 years ago

I think they discovered it immediately, and held onto it. Probably in the hopes that Robert might spill even more, like maybe he would call them up and babble on, telling them where he hid his first wife's body or something else valuable to know. If they had her body as evidence, it would be a much stronger case. They know he talks to himself and about himself in the third person all the time, so it's not surprising that he'd chew himself out in the bathroom after a confrontation. But of course by not telling the police for a while, they had more time to construct the documentary and build public suspense for information.

With such a crucial confrontation for their documentary and for building a case, there's no way they weren't paranoid about making sure they got it on tape properly (you can see at least two cameras filming, perhaps just for safety). Imagine if that exchange had happened yet the camera or mikes weren't working? They must have checked the recorded audio the instant he left and put it in that safety deposit box with the handwriting samples. Then watched their backs for a while...

[–] rgibson-20 8 years ago

The film makers are lying.