Serial Podcast (spoilers starting at post #14) (1 Viewer)

[SIDA!]

Sorry, Shuke.

Didn't really follow the point you are making with your last comment. Please unpack it a bit.

Jay did this interview after Serial aired. He explained why his story was inconsistent at the time. He was really scared and didn't want to involve his grandmother and friends.

I'm not sure what evidence actually points to Adnan not doing this.

Okay. I think I am following you now.

My point was that most everybody felt that there were some inconsistencies/problems with Jay's stories of how it all went down with respect to how they were reported in the Serial.

Jay's interview in The Intercept basically confirmed this. If you believe he is being completely truthful then I suppose your position might be something along the lines of...I knew Jay was hiding something, but now that I know the "real" story I understand it and it makes sense. If you read the interview and come away still doubting Jay, then you obviously still maintain the belief that there was more to the story with Jay.

I would need to re-read The Intercept interviews to give a solid opinion, but I still believe that Jay was involved more than he is letting on. And it really bothers me that he never faced any prison time.

 

[SIDA!]

I can't help but laugh that in the end, I think Jay is sitting free and Adnan is prison, while they both did the murder.

Adnan is just too proud to go back on his story of innocence, so he's keeping up w the charade. And Jay is laughing his ### off that he gets to point the finger at a guy who wont point back due to pride.

I dont think it started this way... I think Jay tried to weasel his way out and put all the blame on adnan, until a lightbulb lit up in his head saying "this guy aint gonna budge on his story, no matter what, so keep rolling w it"

I think if Adnan pointed his finger back from day 1, theyre both in jail for life

Yes, I truly believe that.

Has Adnan ever pointed his finger at Jay? I thought he has only pointed the finger at "I have no idea".-QG

I think both were originally meant to play the dummy card... " i dont know"

Except only adnan stuck w it while jay pointed the finger.

Adnan just seems the type of guy WAY too proud to be known as a liar, so he's sticking w his story despite it being the worst decision ever.

I kno that sounds pretty ludicrous, but that's what I think

Everyone said they weren't really even friends - it was just a guy and his weed dealer. Why would they form some blood pact to kill her?

What possible evidence do you have for this other than it's where your imagination took you?

That is an angle I have never understood.

If you believe Jay did it and framed Adnan (like Neofight), why?

IF they weren't even really friends, why would you encourage a guy to borrow your cell phone and your car? In the context of all the other happenings over the weeks before her disappearance and the day of her death, what makes more sense:

You invite and encourage your weed connect to borrow your car and cell phone for some altruistic purpose or it plays an integral role in a plan you have concocted to kill her in some fashion?

I am not going to sit here and say that I would never loan my car or cell phone in high school to somebody, but I am 99% confident I wouldn't have to even really good friends...let along a casual drug connect.

At the end of the day, you either believe God, Allah, fate or whatever conspired so that many different events all just happened to break the worst way possible for Adnan or you believe that the accumulation of coincidences and what not prove he did it.

 

[RUSF18]

Sorry, Shuke.

Didn't really follow the point you are making with your last comment. Please unpack it a bit.

Jay did this interview after Serial aired. He explained why his story was inconsistent at the time. He was really scared and didn't want to involve his grandmother and friends.

I'm not sure what evidence actually points to Adnan not doing this.

Okay. I think I am following you now.

My point was that most everybody felt that there were some inconsistencies/problems with Jay's stories of how it all went down with respect to how they were reported in the Serial.

Jay's interview in The Intercept basically confirmed this. If you believe he is being completely truthful then I suppose your position might be something along the lines of...I knew Jay was hiding something, but now that I know the "real" story I understand it and it makes sense. If you read the interview and come away still doubting Jay, then you obviously still maintain the belief that there was more to the story with Jay.

I would need to re-read The Intercept interviews to give a solid opinion, but I still believe that Jay was involved more than he is letting on. And it really bothers me that he never faced any prison time.

And getting back to that whole "Walmart jury" crap that was going on around here yesterday...it bothers me that a juror went on record as believing Jay's story because she couldn't figure out why he would be lying when he would be sending himself to jail. Her reaction to being told he didn't serve a day was pretty damn scary. Then you also have the juror who admitted to believing Adnan was guilty because he didn't take the stand.

 

[Soulfly3]

Everyone said they weren't really even friends - it was just a guy and his weed dealer. Why would they form some blood pact to kill her?

What possible evidence do you have for this other than it's where your imagination took you?

and you believe it was just a guy and his weed dealer? that's all it was?

I dont.

 

[bigmarc27]

Everyone said they weren't really even friends - it was just a guy and his weed dealer. Why would they form some blood pact to kill her?

What possible evidence do you have for this other than it's where your imagination took you?

and you believe it was just a guy and his weed dealer? that's all it was?

I dont.

But what reason do you have to believe otherwise besides you just feeling that way?

Adnan said this.

Jay said this.

Every single last one of their friends both mutual and otherwise said they weren't good friends.

But you're presuming everyone is wrong or lying and that they were close friends with a tight bond but hid it for X amount of time from everyone? They hid it for the purpose of killing someone who Jay didn't even know?

It just doesn't make sense.

 

[Soulfly3]

Everyone said they weren't really even friends - it was just a guy and his weed dealer. Why would they form some blood pact to kill her?

What possible evidence do you have for this other than it's where your imagination took you?

and you believe it was just a guy and his weed dealer? that's all it was?

I dont.

But what reason do you have to believe otherwise besides you just feeling that way?

Adnan said this.

Jay said this.

Every single last one of their friends both mutual and otherwise said they weren't good friends.

But you're presuming everyone is wrong or lying and that they were close friends with a tight bond but hid it for X amount of time from everyone? They hid it for the purpose of killing someone who Jay didn't even know?

It just doesn't make sense.

Im also not implying they were good friends.

But there was more than just "this guy sold me weed".

Just like how all Adnan and Hae's friends think they were a great couple and had no issues etc, but Hae's own diary calls him very possessive/jealous (oh ya, TAL left this out of the podcast)

A lot of things happen behind the scenes that ppl dont know about.

I just dont buy he was simply his dealer.

 

[RUSF18]

I still think Adnan and Jay were gay, Hae found out about it and was threatening to out them, and they killed her to shut her up. Adnan didn't want his family/community to know, and it also explains why Adnan never seemed pissed at Jay when he pointed the finger at him.

 

[Soulfly3]

I still think Adnan and Jay were gay, Hae found out about it and was threatening to out them, and they killed her to shut her up. Adnan didn't want his family/community to know, and it also explains why Adnan never seemed pissed at Jay when he pointed the finger at him.

Woah

Me likie.

 

[krista4]

Neofight

It is next to impossible to stick to what you said...when you can't even remember what you wrote. LOL at hyperbolic. Okay.

I am not sure how my pointing to weaknesses on both sides of the case, actually posting things that would be sympathetic to Adnan's case (months ago and even yesterday) would suggest I am personally invested in this or whatever spin you are not trying to put on the conversation to avoid providing solid answers to questions asked.

Every single one of your posts in this thread have been sympathetic/in defense of Adnan as far as I can recall. You are the one exhibiting tunnel vision suggestive of an individual who is personally invested. Dare I say...you are projecting...

At this point this poster is not worth reading or responding to. Not quite official "ignore function" worthy, but I suggest just skipping his posts. He tried to make a similar niggling post to me, saying he thought I was writing "emotionally" about it, when he is actually the only person in this thread who has made oddly emotional posts, to the point where I've actually had to wonder if he has some personal connection to the case.

There are some interesting points to be made on the "I believe Adnan might be innocent" side of the aisle, but none of them are coming from him. I suggest engaging the more logical, rational posters on that front instead.

 

[SIDA!]

Good advice, Krista.

 

[shuke]

The more I reflect on this series, the more I hate it.

 

[Neofight]

For your infotainment: http://viewfromll2.com/2015/01/24/serial-the-prosecutions-use-of-cellphone-location-data-was-inaccurate-misleading-and-deeply-flawed/

TL;DR

The state only had Jay's story, and nothing really corroborated it (except perhaps Jenn's story. Part of the time. If you can make sense of it)

 

[Neofight]

Wonder what Urick's motive was...

 

[Soulfly3]

The more I reflect on this series, the more I hate it.

The more super relevant info you found was left out, the worse it becomes.

But i really enjoyed it... It was entertainment for me. For others, it's part of a crusade for humanity

 

[Neofight]

Some of you may find this interesting: http://viewfromll2.com/2015/01/28/serial-the-prosecutions-bad-faith-withholding-of-crucial-evidence-before-adnans-trials/

No TL;DR. You'll need to read the whole thing. Then read it again to fully grasp it.

 

[MattFancy]

There seems to be so many things that were missed during the trial. I hope all the time and effort all these people have put into the case, do something.

 

[bigmarc27]

I'm well past caring at this point... Wake me up if he gets out of jail or someone admits they did it.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Every time this gets bumped, I click it expecting to see some kind of dramatic turn of events in the case. Every time I come away disappointed.

 

[Fat Nick]

Every time this gets bumped, I click it expecting to see some kind of dramatic turn of events in the case. Every time I come away disappointed.

It's kind of like the MH370 thread...

 

[MattFancy]

Every time this gets bumped, I click it expecting to see some kind of dramatic turn of events in the case. Every time I come away disappointed.

It's kind of like the MH370 thread...

Agreed. I was really into eating up all the info I could right after Serial was over. But now, I'm just kinda over it until something big comes out.

 

[Neofight]

SAST

 

[Short Corner]

Some of you may find this interesting: http://viewfromll2.com/2015/01/28/serial-the-prosecutions-bad-faith-withholding-of-crucial-evidence-before-adnans-trials/

No TL;DR. You'll need to read the whole thing. Then read it again to fully grasp it.

Urick comes off as a borderline sociopath IMO. You would think that the cinviction would be overturned on the grounds of prosecutorial malfeance.

 

[RUSF18]

Some of you may find this interesting: http://viewfromll2.com/2015/01/28/serial-the-prosecutions-bad-faith-withholding-of-crucial-evidence-before-adnans-trials/

No TL;DR. You'll need to read the whole thing. Then read it again to fully grasp it.

Urick comes off as a borderline sociopath IMO. You would think that the cinviction would be overturned on the grounds of prosecutorial malfeance.

I like how you copy and pasted that phrase and still misspelled it.

 

[Neofight]

Some of you may find this interesting: http://viewfromll2.com/2015/01/28/serial-the-prosecutions-bad-faith-withholding-of-crucial-evidence-before-adnans-trials/

No TL;DR. You'll need to read the whole thing. Then read it again to fully grasp it.

Urick comes off as a borderline sociopath IMO. You would think that the cinviction would be overturned on the grounds of prosecutorial malfeance.

I like how you copy and pasted that phrase and still misspelled it.

Should've gone with ####stick. Rolls off the tongue and much easier to spell.

 

[FUBAR]

thoroughly enjoyed this. are there other podcasts like it?

FWIW, I think Adnon did it. But I do not think there was sufficient evidence to convict. Which just goes to show why juries can suck.

 

[Neofight]

http://www.mdcourts.gov/cosappeals/pdfs/syed/cosaorder20150206.pdf

 

[Neofight]

This June the proverbial #### gets real.

 

[Neofight]

And it's Adnan (but what the hell do I know?)!

 

[Neofight]

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to the MD Court of Special Appeals motive?

 

[Sweet J]

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to the MD Court of Special Appeals motive?

All they did was grant him the right to have an appeal, right? I'd love to know how common that is. They aren't granting his appeal, just agreeing to hear it.

 

[Neofight]

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to the MD Court of Special Appeals motive?

All they did was grant him the right to have an appeal, right? I'd love to know how common that is. They aren't granting his appeal, just agreeing to hear it.

Correct. I'll defer to the lawyers/judges as to how common this is, but from what I understand not very. The system is heavily tilted against convicted criminals (whether wrongfully or not).This also means that if the Court of Special Appeals rejects Adnan's appeal, he can then appeal to the Maryland Court of Appeals (Maryland's Supreme Court). This would not have been the case if Adnan's leave to appeal had been denied.

It will be interesting to see what they do regarding the McClain affidavit/alibi; seems likely they will consider it. And then there's the matter of prosecutorial misconduct...

Like I said, after a case filled with claims steeped in fantasy, shoddy investigation and shady tactics by the State's lead prosecutor, this case is about to get a reality check.

ETA the obvious: case marred by Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

 

[Neofight]

Here's agood breakdown (from EvidenceProf http://www.reddit.com/r/serialpodcast/comments/2v2qeg/adnans_application_for_leave_to_appeal_has_been/coe02yk):

A couple of points:

First, This means that the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland will hear Adnan's appeal. What it also means is that, if the Court of Special Appeals rejects Adnan's appeal, he will get to appeal to the Court of Appeals of Maryland (Maryland's Supreme Court). If the Court of Special Appeals had denied Adnan leave to appeal, he would not have been able to appeal to the Court of Appeals of Maryland. As I noted in a prior post:

If the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland gives Adnan leave to appeal and denies his appeal, Adnan can appeal to the Court of Appeals of Maryland. If the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland denies Adnan leave to appeal, he cannot appeal to the Court of Appeals of Maryland.

Second, The Court of Special Appeals of Maryland will decide what to do with Adnan's Supplement/Asia's new affidavit at the hearing in June. As I noted in a prior post, the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland had 5 options for handling Adnan's Application for Leave to Appeal under Maryland Rule 8-204(f), which states that "[o]n review of the application, any response, the record, and any additional information obtained pursuant to section (e) of this Rule, without the submission of briefs or the hearing of argument, the Court shall:

(1) deny the application;

(2) grant the application and affirm the judgment of the lower court;

(3) grant the application and reverse the judgment of the lower court;

(4) grant the application and remand the judgment to the lower court with directions to that court; or

(5) grant the application and order further proceedings in the Court of Special Appeals in accordance with section (g) of this Rule."

The Court of Special Appeals went with option #5, granting the Application for Leave to Appeal and ordering further proceedings: the June hearing. After that hearing, the court can (1) remand to the Circuit Court under Rule 8-204(f)(4) with directions (to allow Asia to testify, etc.); (2) reverse the Circuit Court's judgment under Rule 8-204(f)(3) and grant Adnan a new trial (the State could then appeal to the Court of Appeals of Maryland); or (4) affirm the Circuit Court's judgment under Rule 8-204(f)(3) and deny Adnan a new trial (Adnan could then appeal to the Court of Appeals of Maryland).

 

[Neofight]

On a related note: http://observer.com/2015/01/breaking-ninth-circuit-panel-suggests-perjury-prosecution-for-lying-prosecutors/

 

[Neofight]

Interesting video of recent case in CA where a CI fingered someone for premeditated murder and the prosecutor lied while vouching for the CI. Different jurisdiction but worth a listen:

http://youtu.be/2sCUrhgXjH4

[warning: this stuff is not entertaining in the least]

ETA: Good lord, the State gets thoroughly abused by the judges. Interesting to hear about the network of CI's and how they can receive information that is not public knowledge. Absolutey compelling stuff.

 

[maxwelledison]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/02/07/md-court-will-allow-adnan-syed-to-appeal-his-conviction-in-serial-case/

 

[Sand]

thoroughly enjoyed this. are there other podcasts like it?

FWIW, I think Adnon did it. But I do not think there was sufficient evidence to convict. Which just goes to show why juries can suck.

That's where I got to, as well. With absolutely no physical evidence I just don't see how you convict here.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

thoroughly enjoyed this. are there other podcasts like it?

FWIW, I think Adnon did it. But I do not think there was sufficient evidence to convict. Which just goes to show why juries can suck.

That's where I got to, as well. With absolutely no physical evidence I just don't see how you convict here.

CSI syndrome.

 

[Neofight]

thoroughly enjoyed this. are there other podcasts like it?

FWIW, I think Adnon did it. But I do not think there was sufficient evidence to convict. Which just goes to show why juries can suck.

That's where I got to, as well. With absolutely no physical evidence I just don't see how you convict here.

CSI syndrome.

I don't get why there was physical evidence, including fingernail scrapings from the victim, that was never tested. I'd think testing all physical/scientific evidence should be a requirement for any capital- or life-in-prison case.

The entire thing was a sham, from the investigation to the prosecution. The defense attorney was too compromised and/or corrupt to hire her own experts to refute the State's flimsy case, despite being given adequate compensation to do so. There was a piece on MSNBC's The Docket today with Susan Simpson (of theViewfromLL2 blog), Rabia Chaudry and a cell phone engineer that continued to blow holes in the cell phone data. Urick was invited to join, but after initially agreeing he backed out (saying he wouldn't ever go on). He then issued his half-assed attempt at nipping this thing in the bud (http://thedailyrecord.com/2015/02/11/letter-to-the-editor-the-prosecutor-responds/); but this is only gaining momentum. And that man has a lot to hide.

 

[shuke]

People aren't over this yet?

 

[Neofight]

People aren't over this yet?

You shuked?

 

[Neofight]

This case is so much more interesting than a mere 12 episodes (and a potential defamation suit) could possibly allow...

 

[bigmarc27]

This case is so much more interesting than a mere 12 episodes (and a potential defamation suit) could possibly allow...

Not really that interesting anymore.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Every time this gets bumped, I click it expecting to see some kind of dramatic turn of events in the case. Every time I come away disappointed.

 

[Neofight]

Are you not entertained?

Well, obviously you are, Ivan.

 

[FUBAR]

thoroughly enjoyed this. are there other podcasts like it?

FWIW, I think Adnon did it. But I do not think there was sufficient evidence to convict. Which just goes to show why juries can suck.

That's where I got to, as well. With absolutely no physical evidence I just don't see how you convict here.

CSI syndrome.

I don't get why there was physical evidence, including fingernail scrapings from the victim, that was never tested. I'd think testing all physical/scientific evidence should be a requirement for any capital- or life-in-prison case.

Testing everything as a requirement? No (too many rabbit holes to make an absolute rule) but not doing so should get exploited by the defense and there better be good reasons for the investigators' actions.

IMO there's not a problem convicting based on circumstantial evidence without physical evidence. But there is a problem convicting when there's reasonable doubt and jurors not understanding the facts.

 

[Neofight]

thoroughly enjoyed this. are there other podcasts like it?

FWIW, I think Adnon did it. But I do not think there was sufficient evidence to convict. Which just goes to show why juries can suck.

That's where I got to, as well. With absolutely no physical evidence I just don't see how you convict here.

CSI syndrome.

I don't get why there was physical evidence, including fingernail scrapings from the victim, that was never tested. I'd think testing all physical/scientific evidence should be a requirement for any capital- or life-in-prison case.

Testing everything as a requirement? No (too many rabbit holes to make an absolute rule) but not doing so should get exploited by the defense and there better be good reasons for the investigators' actions.

IMO there's not a problem convicting based on circumstantial evidence without physical evidence. But there is a problem convicting when there's reasonable doubt and jurors not understanding the facts.

Another reason why we need "professional juries" who understand dna, the law, etc. instead of 12 idiots off the street.

Yes, and a better system for teaching civics at an early age would be a good place to start.

 

[TobiasFunke]

If you enjoyed Serial and haven't checked out The Jinx on HBO yet, you should try to do so. Especially (generic spoiler about how story unfolds below, nothing specific about content) ...

Spoiler

if you're one of those people who thinks Serial was good but that it kind of petered out and could have used some fireworks towards the end. The Jinx has some twists and turns and "oh ####" moments

 

[KarmaPolice]

Thanks for the spoilers about the fireworks.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

If you enjoyed Serial and haven't checked out The Jinx on HBO yet, you should try to do so.

Thanks for the heads-up. I don't have HBO, but I'll make a mental note of this for when it shows up on Amazon or Netflix.

 

[John Bender]

The Jinx is really good

And it looks like next week's finale is going to be pretty crazy.