|
Post by Jim on Jul 15, 2015 20:31:24 GMT
So we now know that the new evidence presented in the 5th episode resulted in the LAPD reopening the case of Susan Berman's death. This may have been preventable had the documentary not proceeded. Jarecki commented about the Durst family: "It's as if Bob Durst doesn't exist. It gives you some idea of why Bob Durst wants to be in our film." Maybe. My reading is that sociopaths need stimulation, and thus often live on the edge. Like when Durst stole a sandwich while on the run. Doing this film, focused on these crimes, would be living on the edge if he committed them (which I think he did). Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Ed on Jul 15, 2015 22:33:42 GMT
I've read about a phenomenon where people get away with a crime and it eats away at them so much that they act out just so they can be caught and punished for something. I originally heard about it when OJ was caught in that memorabilia robbery. Can't find the article now, but both stealing that sandwich and agreeing to do this doc seem to be similar.
Also, Andrew Jarecki is a member of a wealthy New York family, maybe Durst thought he'd go easy on him?
|
|