It also bothers me that people who have concluded he's innocent after listening to one or more podcasts are so convinced of it that they won't even entertain the possibility they're wrong and he's actually guilty.
I think he's innocent but I'm open to new evidence. The fact that they had another likely suspect (who happens not to be a Muslim) who they didn't thoroughly investigate is shady. Yes, the podcast are definitely pro- Adnan but the prosecution and the police department definitely dropped the ball or didn't care enough about the truth.
It also bothers me that people who have concluded he's innocent after listening to one or more podcasts are so convinced of it that they won't even entertain the possibility they're wrong and he's actually guilty.
For the record, I do not feel this way. My opinion is that he is not guilty, but I am of course willing to entertain the possibility that he is guilty.
What is the argument for him being guilty? Just that no one else could do it?
He says he doesn't do it. There is no physical evidence. There are hairs from a person who is not Adnan or Hae found in the car. He has Asia confirming his whereabouts at 2:45. He has the track coach confirming he was at track from 3:30-4:30 (?). He has Bilal from the mosque witnessing him there for evening prayers.
The only witness is Jay. As we all know, his story changed multiple times, and then in his Intercept interview this year his story changed again. He admitted to lying to the police.
What's the argument for guilt? A lawful trial with a jury of his peers heard the evidence in a way NONE of us did and found him guilty. To overcome that you have to show me much much more.
What is the argument for him being guilty? Just that no one else could do it?
He says he doesn't do it. There is no physical evidence. There are hairs from a person who is not Adnan or Hae found in the car. He has Asia confirming his whereabouts at 2:45. He has the track coach confirming he was at track from 3:30-4:30 (?). He has Bilal from the mosque witnessing him there for evening prayers.
The only witness is Jay. As we all know, his story changed multiple times, and then in his Intercept interview this year his story changed again. He admitted to lying to the police.
#1 Jay - a witness to seeing Hae dead in the car and hearing Adnan tell him about it killing her
#2 Jay - helping bury the body
His handprint on the map of the area when Hae was found.
A note that said, "I'll kill her" or something at the top
Cell phone records that put him in the area of the potential killing and burial that night
I think if they wouldn't have found Hae's body that they wouldn't have been able to get conviction. Also if they hadn't ever had Jay, the conviction would have been darn near impossible. That's not to say that I think Adnan didn't do it, but I do think his conviction was surprising based on the little evidence besides Jay. Jay had his own demons and issues, and so I don't 100% believe his account and Adnan has to be lying if Jay even knows anything he's told. I think Jay would never talked to the police if the body wasn't found.
All that being said, the body was found, other leads were followed and dismissed, Jay did finally tell the police what he knew (or a couple versions since he was a teenager who didn't want to go to jail forever), and Adnan all along said he wasn't guilty. Adnan also had/has a weird respect for his lawyer that Sarah Koenig didn't - something that led me to feel like his lawyer knew he was guilty and was minimizing the risk.
What is the argument for him being guilty? Just that no one else could do it?
He says he doesn't do it. There is no physical evidence. There are hairs from a person who is not Adnan or Hae found in the car. He has Asia confirming his whereabouts at 2:45. He has the track coach confirming he was at track from 3:30-4:30 (?). He has Bilal from the mosque witnessing him there for evening prayers.
The only witness is Jay. As we all know, his story changed multiple times, and then in his Intercept interview this year his story changed again. He admitted to lying to the police.
I haven't even listened to Serial, but LOL to the defendant denying that he committed a crime being evidence of his innocence.
What's the argument for guilt? A lawful trial with a jury of his peers heard the evidence in a way NONE of us did and found him guilty. To overcome that you have to show me much much more.
I think you just have much more faith in our justice system than I do. But we've been round and round on this and are probably never going to agree.
Four men in Illinois were sentenced to the death penalty following a "lawful trial with a jury of [their] peers." The evidence that exonerated them was uncovered by undergraduate journalism students. Juries are hardly infallible.
Things like not being concerned about the significant and repeated changes in Jay's story, combined with the failure to turn over the cover sheet from AT&T and some other corners that were cut (that I'm not remembering off the top of my head), make me very concerned about the quality of the investigation and the prosecution.
I don't know whether he's guilty. I think it could go either way. But withholding evidence that would influence a witness's testimony and coaching another witness is not how I want my justice system to work. And I don't believe for a second that these types of techniques aren't used to railroad other defendants, particularly those who are poor and black.
What is the argument for him being guilty? Just that no one else could do it?
He says he doesn't do it. There is no physical evidence. There are hairs from a person who is not Adnan or Hae found in the car. He has Asia confirming his whereabouts at 2:45. He has the track coach confirming he was at track from 3:30-4:30 (?). He has Bilal from the mosque witnessing him there for evening prayers.
The only witness is Jay. As we all know, his story changed multiple times, and then in his Intercept interview this year his story changed again. He admitted to lying to the police.
I haven't even listened to Serial, but LOL to the defendant denying that he committed a crime being evidence of his innocence.
Obviously, I was trying to lay out a timeline.
I'm really curious about hearing other people's thoughts.
What is the argument for him being guilty? Just that no one else could do it?
He says he doesn't do it. There is no physical evidence. There are hairs from a person who is not Adnan or Hae found in the car. He has Asia confirming his whereabouts at 2:45. He has the track coach confirming he was at track from 3:30-4:30 (?). He has Bilal from the mosque witnessing him there for evening prayers.
The only witness is Jay. As we all know, his story changed multiple times, and then in his Intercept interview this year his story changed again. He admitted to lying to the police.
#1 Jay - a witness to seeing Hae dead in the car and hearing Adnan tell him about it killing her
#2 Jay - helping bury the body
His handprint on the map of the area when Hae was found.
A note that said, "I'll kill her" or something at the top
Cell phone records that put him in the area of the potential killing and burial that night
I think if they wouldn't have found Hae's body that they wouldn't have been able to get conviction. Also if they hadn't ever had Jay, the conviction would have been darn near impossible. That's not to say that I think Adnan didn't do it, but I do think his conviction was surprising based on the little evidence besides Jay. Jay had his own demons and issues, and so I don't 100% believe his account and Adnan has to be lying if Jay even knows anything he's told. I think Jay would never talked to the police if the body wasn't found.
All that being said, the body was found, other leads were followed and dismissed, Jay did finally tell the police what he knew (or a couple versions since he was a teenager who didn't want to go to jail forever), and Adnan all along said he wasn't guilty. Adnan also had/has a weird respect for his lawyer that Sarah Koenig didn't - something that led me to feel like his lawyer knew he was guilty and was minimizing the risk.
On Undisclosed (again, pro Adnan source), they reported on the interviews with the jury after the first trial that ended in mistrial. They said the jurors were wondering why Jay wasn't the one on trial. I think I may have been thinking the same thing. Well, based on what I have heard from the podcasts.
#1 Jay - a witness to seeing Hae dead in the car and hearing Adnan tell him about it killing her
#2 Jay - helping bury the body
His handprint on the map of the area when Hae was found.
A note that said, "I'll kill her" or something at the top
Cell phone records that put him in the area of the potential killing and burial that night
I think if they wouldn't have found Hae's body that they wouldn't have been able to get conviction. Also if they hadn't ever had Jay, the conviction would have been darn near impossible. That's not to say that I think Adnan didn't do it, but I do think his conviction was surprising based on the little evidence besides Jay. Jay had his own demons and issues, and so I don't 100% believe his account and Adnan has to be lying if Jay even knows anything he's told. I think Jay would never talked to the police if the body wasn't found.
All that being said, the body was found, other leads were followed and dismissed, Jay did finally tell the police what he knew (or a couple versions since he was a teenager who didn't want to go to jail forever), and Adnan all along said he wasn't guilty. Adnan also had/has a weird respect for his lawyer that Sarah Koenig didn't - something that led me to feel like his lawyer knew he was guilty and was minimizing the risk.
On Undisclosed (again, pro Adnan source), they reported on the interviews with the jury after the first trial that ended in mistrial. They said the jurors were wondering why Jay wasn't the one on trial. I think I may have been thinking the same thing. Well, based on what I have heard from the podcasts.
Same thing is hinted at with the Serial podcasts, but the problem is that Adnan got a mistrial and then the state had time to work with their witness and change their questioning and the second trial, the one that counts, he is viewed differently by the jury. So that jury convicted Adnan.
What's the argument for guilt? A lawful trial with a jury of his peers heard the evidence in a way NONE of us did and found him guilty. To overcome that you have to show me much much more.
I think you just have much more faith in our justice system than I do. But we've been round and round on this and are probably never going to agree.
Four men in Illinois were sentenced to the death penalty following a "lawful trial with a jury of [their] peers." The evidence that exonerated them was uncovered by undergraduate journalism students. Juries are hardly infallible.
Things like not being concerned about the significant and repeated changes in Jay's story, combined with the failure to turn over the cover sheet from AT&T and some other corners that were cut (that I'm not remembering off the top of my head), make me very concerned about the quality of the investigation and the prosecution.
I don't know whether he's guilty. I think it could go either way. But withholding evidence that would influence a witness's testimony and coaching another witness is not how I want my justice system to work. And I don't believe for a second that these types of techniques aren't used to railroad other defendants, particularly those who are poor and black.
No I don't believe our justice system is perfect. Far from it. I just don't think this case is idicative of the real problems. You asked "aren't you troubled..." Yes very much so. Troubled that a podcast can upend the results of a jury trial, troubled that a message board can engage in character assignation of a witness, troubled that one case can get this much attention because one defendant has the means and resources to a mic, troubled that the Reddit masses think they know more than an attorney or a jury or anyone in a courtroom. Does this mean Adnan is guilty? No. But this is what troubles me more than the fact that he was found guilty.
What's the argument for guilt? A lawful trial with a jury of his peers heard the evidence in a way NONE of us did and found him guilty. To overcome that you have to show me much much more.
I think you just have much more faith in our justice system than I do. But we've been round and round on this and are probably never going to agree.
Four men in Illinois were sentenced to the death penalty following a "lawful trial with a jury of [their] peers." The evidence that exonerated them was uncovered by undergraduate journalism students. Juries are hardly infallible.
Things like not being concerned about the significant and repeated changes in Jay's story, combined with the failure to turn over the cover sheet from AT&T and some other corners that were cut (that I'm not remembering off the top of my head), make me very concerned about the quality of the investigation and the prosecution.
I don't know whether he's guilty. I think it could go either way. But withholding evidence that would influence a witness's testimony and coaching another witness is not how I want my justice system to work. And I don't believe for a second that these types of techniques aren't used to railroad other defendants, particularly those who are poor and black.
Yes, yes, and yes. To me, it's not about his guilt or innocence, it's about the horrible investigation and that the trial hinged on testimony that changed more often than some people change their underwear. Not a credible witness! If they had other more substantial evidence, I wouldn't care so much about Jay's (changing) version of events. But the case was built on his testimony, testimony that is completely and totally unreliable. If the jury had been privy to all the different versions of Jay's story, would they have believed Jay?
What is the argument for him being guilty? Just that no one else could do it?
He says he doesn't do it. There is no physical evidence. There are hairs from a person who is not Adnan or Hae found in the car. He has Asia confirming his whereabouts at 2:45. He has the track coach confirming he was at track from 3:30-4:30 (?). He has Bilal from the mosque witnessing him there for evening prayers.
The only witness is Jay. As we all know, his story changed multiple times, and then in his Intercept interview this year his story changed again. He admitted to lying to the police.
#1 Jay - a witness to seeing Hae dead in the car and hearing Adnan tell him about it killing her If you believe Jay isn't lyingabout this
#2 Jay - helping bury the body If you believe Jay isn't lying about this
His handprint on the map of the area when Hae was found. A handprint on a map in his ex girlfriend/friend's car, as well as lots of other places in her car, like one would naturally expect.
A note that said, "I'll kill her" or something at the top The note says "I'm going to kill" not "I'll kill her" -- could mean anyone, no way to actually know--any way, remembering being a teenager during a break up, this is pretty weak "proof" in my mind
Cell phone records that put him in the area of the potential killing and burial that night Cell records that don't actually show that, witnesses stating Adnan was in other places at the "timeline" presented in trial, and evidence debunking the presented timeline as even possible including the burial time
I think if they wouldn't have found Hae's body that they wouldn't have been able to get conviction. Also if they hadn't ever had Jay, the conviction would have been darn near impossible. That's not to say that I think Adnan didn't do it, but I do think his conviction was surprising based on the little evidence besides Jay. Jay had his own demons and issues, and so I don't 100% believe his account and Adnan has to be lying if Jay even knows anything he's told. I think Jay would never talked to the police if the body wasn't found.
All that being said, the body was found, other leads were followed and dismissed, Jay did finally tell the police what he knew (or a couple versions since he was a teenager who didn't want to go to jail forever), and Adnan all along said he wasn't guilty. Adnan also had/has a weird respect for his lawyer that Sarah Koenig didn't - something that led me to feel like his lawyer knew he was guilty and was minimizing the risk.
I don't view any of what you listed above as proving Adnan did it. The note is the only possible valid evidence in my mind (for the reasons in bold) and if that is enough for a conviction for murder, I should be chilling out in jail with 90% of my teenage friends right now.
I don't feel that anything Jay says can be relied on at all. I know the cell phone data does not prove what they claimed it does (thanks to having a family member working in the field--makes watching TV detective shows using cell data like watching House with a real Doctor, the joy is sucked right on out).
I'm open to evidence showing his guilt, but so far, I've not seen/heard anything that convinces me he did anything. I totally get how he was convicted. I totally get how hard it would be to get a new trial. I do think that if he got a new trial, he would be found innocent unless there is other evidence that hasn't been covered in any of the sources I've looked at/heard (which I am willing to accept might exist).
Post by tacosforlife on Dec 18, 2015 13:37:40 GMT -5
heyjude, I respect your position, but I disagree. To me, this case raises red flags. If an investigation was this shoddy when a defendant hired pricey private counsel, how shoddy do we think investigations by this department were when a poor defendant had an overworked public defender?
I am not bothered by a podcast bringing these questions to light because I don't know who else would do it. The four men in Illinois got lucky that a group of journalism students were looking for a senior project because they didn't have resources. I don't know who else we would expect to investigate these cases post-conviction.
heyjude, I respect your position, but I disagree. To me, this case raises red flags. If an investigation was this shoddy when a defendant hired pricey private counsel, how shoddy do we think investigations by this department were when a poor defendant had an overworked public defender?
I am not bothered by a podcast bringing these questions to light because I don't know who else would do it. The four men in Illinois got lucky that a group of journalism students were looking for a senior project because they didn't have resources. I don't know who else we would expect to investigate these cases post-conviction.
Exactly! What is the alternative?! We continue let prosecutors and police departments do whatever the hell they want?
#1 Jay - a witness to seeing Hae dead in the car and hearing Adnan tell him about it killing her If you believe Jay isn't lyingabout this
#2 Jay - helping bury the body If you believe Jay isn't lying about this
His handprint on the map of the area when Hae was found. A handprint on a map in his ex girlfriend/friend's car, as well as lots of other places in her car, like one would naturally expect.
A note that said, "I'll kill her" or something at the top The note says "I'm going to kill" not "I'll kill her" -- could mean anyone, no way to actually know--any way, remembering being a teenager during a break up, this is pretty weak "proof" in my mind
Cell phone records that put him in the area of the potential killing and burial that night Cell records that don't actually show that, witnesses stating Adnan was in other places at the "timeline" presented in trial, and evidence debunking the presented timeline as even possible including the burial time
I think if they wouldn't have found Hae's body that they wouldn't have been able to get conviction. Also if they hadn't ever had Jay, the conviction would have been darn near impossible. That's not to say that I think Adnan didn't do it, but I do think his conviction was surprising based on the little evidence besides Jay. Jay had his own demons and issues, and so I don't 100% believe his account and Adnan has to be lying if Jay even knows anything he's told. I think Jay would never talked to the police if the body wasn't found.
All that being said, the body was found, other leads were followed and dismissed, Jay did finally tell the police what he knew (or a couple versions since he was a teenager who didn't want to go to jail forever), and Adnan all along said he wasn't guilty. Adnan also had/has a weird respect for his lawyer that Sarah Koenig didn't - something that led me to feel like his lawyer knew he was guilty and was minimizing the risk.
I don't view any of what you listed above as proving Adnan did it. The note is the only possible valid evidence in my mind (for the reasons in bold) and if that is enough for a conviction for murder, I should be chilling out in jail with 90% of my teenage friends right now.
I don't feel that anything Jay says can be relied on at all. I know the cell phone data does not prove what they claimed it does (thanks to having a family member working in the field--makes watching TV detective shows using cell data like watching House with a real Doctor, the joy is sucked right on out).
I'm open to evidence showing his guilt, but so far, I've not seen/heard anything that convinces me he did anything. I totally get how he was convicted. I totally get how hard it would be to get a new trial. I do think that if he got a new trial, he would be found innocent unless there is other evidence that hasn't been covered in any of the sources I've looked at/heard (which I am willing to accept might exist).
That's the point. You weren't the jury and the prosecution did use these lines of evidence to show the jury that he was guilty. While I also don't think they should have convicted on the evidence presented in the podcasts, we don't get to decide. Adnan's lawyer did not provide a defense that made that particular jury disbelieve Jay or think the handprint didn't mean anything or believe that all teenangers have angst and it had nothing to do with Hae dying to mention killing in a note or that the cell phone records should be disbelieved or show that Adnan didn't actually have his cell phone on him. She didn't succeed in showing that jury that the state's evidence was not enough to convict. Also, she didn't follow-up on the alibi option or the lack of DNA from Hae's body or the track coach or any of that. She failed him and the prosecution took the evidence they did have and it was enough to convict. She also didn't get the jury to hear or like him at all - he never took the stand so the jury could only hear Jay's account.
As to evidence of guilt - I don't know what you want. I can't give that to you. But that's the point of the podcast, not to get Adnan another trial. It shined a light as to the messy world of the justice system and how real life cases are messy and not easy and lawyers are infallible just like witnesses, so there is no right and wrong when it comes to justice, only the best you can do with what you have at the time.
I think you just have much more faith in our justice system than I do. But we've been round and round on this and are probably never going to agree.
Four men in Illinois were sentenced to the death penalty following a "lawful trial with a jury of [their] peers." The evidence that exonerated them was uncovered by undergraduate journalism students. Juries are hardly infallible.
Things like not being concerned about the significant and repeated changes in Jay's story, combined with the failure to turn over the cover sheet from AT&T and some other corners that were cut (that I'm not remembering off the top of my head), make me very concerned about the quality of the investigation and the prosecution.
I don't know whether he's guilty. I think it could go either way. But withholding evidence that would influence a witness's testimony and coaching another witness is not how I want my justice system to work. And I don't believe for a second that these types of techniques aren't used to railroad other defendants, particularly those who are poor and black.
No I don't believe our justice system is perfect. Far from it. I just don't think this case is idicative of the real problems. You asked "aren't you troubled..." Yes very much so. Troubled that a podcast can upend the results of a jury trial, troubled that a message board can engage in character assignation of a witness, troubled that one case can get this much attention because one defendant has the means and resources to a mic, troubled that the Reddit masses think they know more than an attorney or a jury or anyone in a courtroom. Does this mean Adnan is guilty? No. But this is what troubles me more than the fact that he was found guilty.
Would you prefer everyone stop talking about this?
No I don't believe our justice system is perfect. Far from it. I just don't think this case is idicative of the real problems. You asked "aren't you troubled..." Yes very much so. Troubled that a podcast can upend the results of a jury trial, troubled that a message board can engage in character assignation of a witness, troubled that one case can get this much attention because one defendant has the means and resources to a mic, troubled that the Reddit masses think they know more than an attorney or a jury or anyone in a courtroom. Does this mean Adnan is guilty? No. But this is what troubles me more than the fact that he was found guilty.
Would you prefer everyone stop talking about this?
Post by tacosforlife on Dec 18, 2015 13:48:54 GMT -5
Also, because @mrsbecky just privately accused me of being an "Adnan supporter" (), I feel the need to clarify that I do not consider myself an "Adnan supporter." He very well may have done it. No, I consider myself to be in the "the police and prosecutors were shady as fuck" camp.
Post by tacosforlife on Dec 18, 2015 13:50:44 GMT -5
Also, for the record, I would like to note that statistically, Adnan probably did do it. Women all too frequently are killed by partners and ex-partners. I just don't think the investigation and prosecution lived up to what we should expect from our justice system.
Also, for the record, I would like to note that statistically, Adnan probably did do it. Women all too frequently are killed by partners and ex-partners. I just don't think the investigation and prosecution lived up to what we should expect from our justice system.
Ditto. And I also don't discount that Jay and Adnan also were likely racially profiled too. They were black and middle eastern and I think both of those bias juries toward guilt.
ETA: This was from last spring, but I think we talked about it here. There was evidence of prior possessiveness and potential abusive actions in Adnan's and Hae's relationships that did come up in trial and was part of the "evidence" that prosecutors used to show that Adnan was upset about their relationship and potentially enough to kill Hae.
If you have faith that he is guilty because a jury convicted him, then I expect that you would have the same faith in the same system failing to be "convinced" by a podcast and a crowd-sourced murder investigation.
Post by jojoandleo on Dec 18, 2015 14:00:51 GMT -5
I am team tacosforlife here. I think Adnan very well may have done it, but there was a lot of shadiness, especially where Jay was concerned. The prosecution finding Jay's lawyer for him? No. NOT OKAY. And maybe I would feel different had I sat on that jury, but from what the jury member said: she convicted because why would Jay lie? Well, we know Jay DID lie, sooo...
And I am okay with this podcast shining light on issues with our justice system. I live in Oklahoma, though, where the Innocence Project found out our system was falsifying DNA to convict people to fucking DEATH ROW. I also think it was a good story. Hence why people are still rather heatedly arguing this shit. Law and Order uses real crimes too, they just claim they don't so as to not get sued. I am NOT okay with the people thinking they are the Hardy Boys and calling Jay's house, etc. That shit is not cool.
Would you prefer everyone stop talking about this?
Where did I say that?
Well, you keep saying that you find it crazy that people on a message board and/or podcast are talking about this. ETA: It's a question, not an accusation.
Troubled that a podcast can upend the results of a jury trial, troubled that a message board can engage in character assignation of a witness, troubled that one case can get this much attention because one defendant has the means and resources to a mic, troubled that the Reddit masses think they know more than an attorney or a jury or anyone in a courtroom.
Post by gretchenindisguise on Dec 18, 2015 14:04:24 GMT -5
I just feel bad for all of the other people in prison for whom the spotlight has not/will not be placed. I don't think the prosecution/conviction of Adnan is an anomaly.
If you have faith that he is guilty because a jury convicted him, then I expect that you would have the same faith in the same system failing to be "convinced" by a podcast and a crowd-sourced murder investigation.
I'm confused by your statement. Almost all who are in here saying that he was convicted haven't decryed "rightly convicted." Most are saying that he was found guilty by that jury b/c the prosecution presented a believable case to the jury at that time. Some are saying, he might not be guilty, but we don't know b/c there were holes in his defense and the investigation could have been biased.
If you have faith that he is guilty because a jury convicted him, then I expect that you would have the same faith in the same system failing to be "convinced" by a podcast and a crowd-sourced murder investigation.
I'm confused by your statement. Almost all who are in here saying that he was convicted haven't decryed "rightly convicted." Most are saying that he was found guilty by that jury b/c the prosecution presented a believable case to the jury at that time. Some are saying, he might not be guilty, but we don't know b/c there were holes in his defense and the investigation could have been biased.
I guess I'm just responding to those that are annoyed that a podcast is supposedly causing MD to look at this case again. I would expect those same people to believe that a podcast or thousands of followers will cause a judge to treat this case any differently than they did the first time. It's just ironic to me that they would have faith in the justice system when he was convicted but not when there is a hearing to overturn his conviction.
Post by downtoearth on Dec 18, 2015 14:22:58 GMT -5
Oh and Rabia has also written a book about Adnan's innocence, which was announced in late November after the judge agreed to have a hearing and hear about Asia as an alibi and re-examine cell phone tower data and it's validity.
It’s been nearly a year since the finale of Serial, the This American Life spin-off podcast that captivated millions, but Adnan Syed’s case is no further from our minds.
Now, EW can announce exclusively that Rabia Chaudry, co-host of the podcast Undisclosed, and the person who initially brought Syed’s case to the attention of Serial’s Sarah Koenig, has written a book called Adnan’s Story: Murder, Justice, and The Case That Captivated a Nation, to be published by St. Martin’s Press in September 2016.
The book, which Chaudry is writing with Syed’s cooperation, “will reexamine the investigation that led to Adnan Syed’s arrest, share his life in prison, discuss new evidence and possibilities that have since come to light, and review the recent court successes — including a ruling by a Maryland judge to reopen Syed’s case,” according to St. Martin’s. Chaudry recently told EW that Syed’s case would likely not have been reopened if it weren’t for the popularity of Serial.
“The first letter I received after being arrested in 1999 was from Rabia,” Syed says in a release. “Since that time until now, she has believed in my innocence and been committed to my exoneration. There have been appeal hearings in which she is the only other person other than my mother who showed up. Rabia, Saad, and their family are one of the only families that never forgot me. Over the years they never stopped visiting me, taking my calls, sending me letters and books, and praying for me. As someone connected to me, my family, my community, my lawyers, and my investigation, there is no one better to help tell my story, and no one that I trust more to tell it, than Rabia.”
Post by tacosforlife on Dec 18, 2015 14:27:53 GMT -5
OK, I will not bother with a book by Rabia at all. She is not even close to objective. I liked Serial because SK was open about what was swaying her and what wasn't, but she didn't just go in guns a-blazing HE IS INNOCENT the way Rabia is. She has zero objectivity.
I'm confused by your statement. Almost all who are in here saying that he was convicted haven't decryed "rightly convicted." Most are saying that he was found guilty by that jury b/c the prosecution presented a believable case to the jury at that time. Some are saying, he might not be guilty, but we don't know b/c there were holes in his defense and the investigation could have been biased.
I guess I'm just responding to those that are annoyed that a podcast is supposedly causing MD to look at this case again. I would expect those same people to believe that a podcast or thousands of followers will cause a judge to treat this case any differently than they did the first time. It's just ironic to me that they would have faith in the justice system when he was convicted but not when there is a hearing to overturn his conviction.
I can't speak for others, but it's not so much that I worry a judge would hear the podcast and be biased, what I think about is that Asia McClain seemed to change from indifferent to a key witness from when the podcast was recorded to post-podcast. It's not wrong, it's just strange and likely related to the podcast. If I remember correctly, in the original podcast Asia was reserved and said, "Yeah, I remember Adnan there and my boyfriend and his friend picked me up and my boyfriend was jealous and it snowed (even though the snow date is off). I sent a letter to him and talked to his parents. I just thought it wasn't important b/c they didn't call me and that he must be guilty." Now she is 50% as to why the judge granted a new hearing that Adnan has not been able to get in the past.
ETA: Basically I'm saying that the podcast DID change the course of the case b/c Asia was found and realized how important it was for her to tell the court that she say Adnan that day.