'Serial' case: Adnan Syed hearing wraps up

[downtoearth]

I know some of you are over Season 1 of Serial, but this was interesting:

Sarah Koenig went back and covered a couple days of the hearings for Serial - I haven't' listened yet.

serialpodcast.org/season-one/adnan-syeds-hearing

----------

'Serial' case: Adnan Syed hearing wraps up

www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-syed-hearing-day-five-20160209-story.html

-------------

Basically, it came down to Adnan's lawyers saying that his first counsel, Gutierrez, was ineffectual and the defense showing letters from Adnan that said he wanted Gutierrez to stay on the case and evidence of the leads she did follow. 

Oh and Asia, the alibi, did testify that she wasn't contacted by Gutierrez and said she saw Adnan in the library on the say of the murder.  But I think a cell phone guy also testified that the cell phone testimony was still valid and that like 3.5 out of the 4 times a tower put Adnan's phone in Linken Park at the time the Jay said they were there.

The judge has not decided if the hearing will result in another trial, yet.

It won't let me copy the text for some reason, but worth reading.

[lyssbobiss, Command, B613]

Thank you for posting, I want to talk about this!

The cell phone stuff did nothing either way for me, honestly. It still seems extremely inconclusive. But the evidence against Gutierrez seems damning. 40 potential witnesses and maybe 4 people were contacted? That's insane.

Regardless, it seems as though no matter what the judge rules, the other side will appeal, so it doesn't seem to have gotten us anywhere, really - unless someone who understands better can fill me in more?

[downtoearth]

I think the big thing I get out of this is that an awareness and social campaign might be able to get added scrutiny for cases where bias may have been present. I do not necessarily think Adnan is innocent, but I do wonder if some of the state's info about his religion was borderline out of line. And we can't know how much of that influenced jurors.

It is good, IMO, to look at if we have had biases in the past and how to eliminate those in the future cases tried by state entities.

[newboardnewme]

I have been obsessively refreshing Twitter #AdnanSyed since mid last week as the hearing took place and in the aftermath. I was a Serial fan and then moved on to Undisclosed and was hooked even further --- so much more in depth information. I only heard a couple of Bob Ruff's Truth and Justice podcasts, but the last one (133 I think)had a doozy of a finish. He says that they have evidence that someone else killed Hae. And he called for Jay to come forward and admit he lied. He says Jay had no part in this (other than the lying) and that the State will have no choice but to come after him once Adnan has a new trial and is cleared. We'll see what happens there.

But if you want admittedly biased, but interesting, snarky, and thorough recaps from the hearing, check out TheFrisky writer Amelia McDonell-Parry's coverage. There are plenty of other recaps out there that are less biased and you should take a look at them too.

I can't wait to see what the judge decides. I can't help but think he has to rule in favor of a new trial given the testimony and lack thereof (from the State) at the hearing last week and this week!

[newboardnewme]

The cell phone calls were shown to be unreliable by two calls 27 minutes apart (not from the date of the murder) that would have Adnan driving insane speeds to get from one location to the other. If those calls were not pinging or registering expected or logical towers, then how can you say the calls for the date of the murder were registering the right towers. Incoming call data are unreliable, as stated by AT&T. The original State cell phone expert wouldn't stand by his testimony from Adnan's earlier trial because he wasn't aware of how faulty the incoming call data were at the time.

[elleblue]

Feb 10, 2016 19:24:56 GMT -5 newboardnewme said:

The cell phone calls were shown to be unreliable by two calls 27 minutes apart (not from the date of the murder) that would have Adnan driving insane speeds to get from one location to the other. If those calls were not pinging or registering expected or logical towers, then how can you say the calls for the date of the murder were registering the right towers. Incoming call data are unreliable, as stated by AT&T. The original State cell phone expert wouldn't stand by his testimony from Adnan's earlier trial because he wasn't aware of how faulty the incoming call data were at the time.

Right. Cell phones ping off the nearest uncrowded cell tower. Not a completely reliable way to account for a person's movements. 

[newboardnewme]

The lividity evidence indicates the State's timeline and story of what happened to Hae are all wrong anyway. Those cell phone calls they keep harping on wouldn't have anything to do with the time of her burial anyway. Her body was at rest in a different position (though definitely NOT crumpled up in the trunk of a car)for a significant period of time (more than the 5 hours from 2:30 to 7:30) before it was buried in the park. They got the basic story wrong early on, and built a timeline based on assumptions and a failure to properly analyze the evidence before them. But all of that means that the library alibi from Asia may not have anything to do with the time of the murder either. The basic issue is that Adnan deserves a new trial, whether or not he is ultimately found guilty. The original trial was based on a lot of bunk in terms of "evidence". And his lawyer did a craptastic job of mounting a defense.

[lexus]

Feb 10, 2016 19:29:13 GMT -5 elleblue said:

Feb 10, 2016 19:24:56 GMT -5 newboardnewme said:

The cell phone calls were shown to be unreliable by two calls 27 minutes apart (not from the date of the murder) that would have Adnan driving insane speeds to get from one location to the other. If those calls were not pinging or registering expected or logical towers, then how can you say the calls for the date of the murder were registering the right towers. Incoming call data are unreliable, as stated by AT&T. The original State cell phone expert wouldn't stand by his testimony from Adnan's earlier trial because he wasn't aware of how faulty the incoming call data were at the time.

Right. Cell phones ping off the nearest uncrowded cell tower. Not a completely reliable way to account for a person's movements. 

Sarah also pointed out that if you are traveling (let's say by plane), your phone is off while traveling and people call you, the cell records will show up as incoming calls to your original location.

[lexus]

I wonder if or when the transcripts from this PCR hearingsl will be available to the public. The link in the OP has some very different interpretations of the events than Serial or Undisclosed.

Also, who wants to bet the evidence referenced on Truth and Justice points to Don?

[elleblue]

Feb 10, 2016 20:27:41 GMT -5 lexus said:

Also, who wants to bet the evidence referenced on Truth and Justice points to Don?

That would be my guess. 

[lexus]

Feb 10, 2016 20:39:28 GMT -5 @mrsbecky said:

Feb 10, 2016 20:27:41 GMT -5 lexus said:

I wonder if or when the transcripts from this PCR hearingsl will be available to the public. The link in the OP has some very different interpretations of the events than Serial or Undisclosed.

Sigh. Justin Fenton holds up pretty well. He is on the original serial podcast with SK.

I'm actually trying to be impartial and read the info myself instead of relying on other people's impressions. Since when is it preferred to take someone else's impression as the truth rather than getting the facts from the source? Why is that sigh worthy?

[lexus]

Feb 10, 2016 20:45:47 GMT -5 @mrsbecky said:

Feb 10, 2016 20:42:21 GMT -5 lexus said:

I'm actually trying to be impartial and read the info myself instead of relying on other people's impressions. Since when is it preferred to take someone else's impression as the truth rather than getting the facts from the source? Why is that sigh worthy?

Original source is always best. That goes without saying.

The sigh is because you seem to be implying that Justin fenton's reporting is off because it does not line up with what undisclosed is reporting. He's not really anti-Adnan. If anything I would say he is biased towards Adnan. But I general he is a very good reporter.

I'm very pro-Adnan but the differences in their interpretations is pretty significant and raised a red flag to me. It's not that I think he's wrong but rather that the rules about recording devices and media would further complicate an already emotionally charged situation. It's asking for bias to influence reporting (in the podcasts and in print). They can't even review tape from the trial to edit out their own bias.