article_snippet: (CNN)The end of "Jinx," the six-part HBO documentary about real estate heir Robert Durst, has launched a debate about whether some potentially incriminating statements Durst made while in the bathroom to a microphone may be used in his criminal prosecution.
article_snippet: Robert Durst, as you probably heard, is charged with murder in a killing in California 15 years ago, and his has been suspected, but never charged, in the disappearance of his first wife in New York.
article_snippet: While Robert Durst's attorneys can make a number of arguments to suppress these statements and bar these statements , the bathroom confessions will likely be factored in.
article_snippet: Is this a violation of Durst's constitutional privilege against self-incrimination?
article_snippet: Durst may still contend that Durst "confession" wasn't voluntary.  
article_snippet: What of Durst's likely claim that the filmmakers were essentially acting as an arm of the police?  
article_snippet: Durst would have to establish that the HBO interviewers were direct agents of the police and that the interview was coerced by police.
article_snippet: How was Durst "pressured" when alone in the bathroom?  
article_snippet: Can Durst argue for some "reasonable expectation of privacy" that was violated by Durst being taped in the bathroom?
highlights_snippet: Robert Durst made some potentially incriminating statements at the end of HBO's "Jinx"
  Danny Cevallos: Durst's attorneys will want to bar Durst's attorneys admission at trial, but Durst's attorneys will likely be factored in .