Adnan Syed - Serial / Undisclosed

xjx388 said:
Right: Jay told her. Everything Jenn knows is out of Jay’s mouth. It’s reasonable to suspect that Jay may not have been telling the truth; he could have been telling Jenn what he wanted her to hear.

And we don’t even know with 100% certainty that events happened the way Jay and Jenn say it did.

I’m not even 100% certain that Jay had the phone the whole day. 2 calls on the log call this into question, for me: 1)The call to Jenn’s home at 3:21pm. Jay’s testimony was that he was at Jenn’s house until about 3:45. Why would he call the landline of the house he is at? That could be the “come pick me up,” call from Adnan, which means Adnan had his phone. 2)The Nisha call from Adnan’s phone at 3:32. Jay has no reason to call Nisha and the call went on for over 2 minutes. This almost had to be Adnan calling Nisha while waiting for Jay.

The call log just doesn’t completely make sense if you believe Jay.

But again, Jenn only knows what Jay has told her. Plus, they were good friends and it’s likely Jenn and Jay spoke after her interview and she told him what she told the police.

We don’t know that for sure. But I do agree it’s unlikely Jay killed Hae. But it’s still a possibility, one that was not explored once Jay said Adnan did it. Yes. This establishes a motive for Adnan to kill her. This does not prove he killed her though.

I have done a lot of reading about this case from both sides. I have looked at a lot of the police file. I don’t have any skin in the game. All I’m saying is that I don’t think it’s possible for anyone to be certain about what happened. My position is simple: don’t know, not enough info.

As far as the police file goes, I have been looking through that. Thanks for linking to it.
Click to expand...

xjx388 said:
Primarily because ATT says incoming calls are not reliable for location. Therefore, nothing can be concluded with any certainty. The most we can say is that it’s possible the cell was in that area at that time. How probable? Don’t know.

Literally any other. The two named in the MtV for starters. They should have looked closer at Don. They should have chased every lead down even if they thought they had their man. But they didn’t.
Click to expand...

Re: the phone records. If the location information putting Syed at Leakin Park are not valid, consider this - those 2 calls are the only times he is placed there. It is not like that phone picked up that tower at any other time. Moreover, there was an outgoing call placing Syed at the car’s location, so if incoming is no good, there is an outgoing call. The disclaimer is for incoming calls that don’t reach the handset. Not for answered calls like the ones referenced in this case. The AT&T coverage maps and drive test maps are in the police file.

At 3:15 pm there was a 20-second incoming call then an outgoing call to Jen at 3:21. Jay was likely supposed to meet Syed at Best Buy at 3:15pm. Best Buy was covered by the incoming call at 3:15 pm and by the outgoing call at 3:21 pm.
Jay insisted he was at Jen's house until 3:45 pm despite the phone records contradicting it and he testified to it. His insistence on this alibi is most likely due to a fear of taking the wrap for Hae's murder.

The Nisha call puts Syed and Jay together. She spoke to both of them and testified about the call. At the very least, they were together with the phone at the time. This call has always been a big problem for Syed.

The people in the MtV were Bilal and A. Sellers. Bilal was well known to the defense, as well as the prosecution. He testified at the grand jury hearing. He also had no reason to kill Hae, as he didn’t know her. Sellers, the guy who found the body, took 2 polygraphs and was interviewed. His employment records show him as clocked in at work at that time. He did fail the first polygraph, but he said it was because he was supposed to have met his wife and a real estate agent and was busy taking a polygraph so he was concerned about how much trouble he was in. That is why they retested him at a later date.

I am glad you are balancing the information. I have the complete, unredacted police file with pictures, but I haven’t uploaded it anywhere, as the 3 of us agreed not to let the exhumation photos out into the interwebs. If there is anything that is redacted that you wonder about, I probably have it unredacted.

I am so disgusted by this innocence fraud because I have watched for 8 years while Chaudry has thrown everything at the wall to get something to stick. This includes victim blaming, altering official records to suit her agenda, and outright lying. Appeal after appeal failed. She has become a wealthy woman from this case and she is a vile human being. Cross her and she will send her Twitter army to destroy you. I have received death threats. I completely believe Syed choked the life out of Hae and honestly, I think she knows it.
 
Chris,

I linked above to the original documents. They did test the nails in 1999 and “nothing of evidentiary value was found.” It would be nice to have those raw data files and such, but I do not have anything like that. I’m not really sure what was even available in 1999 with respect to dna.
 
angrysoba said:
Why do you have no idea?
What do you mean "deal with it"?
Is this weird, phoney bluster ("Deal with it.", "Who cares?", "Big deal.") a way of avoiding considering the question of who killed Hae-min Lee?
And what is it that you understand about Mosby's words, "the case is over"?
Do you think she is only referring to the case as it relates to Adnan, or do you think it means that the search for the killer is over?
Click to expand...
I am in no way trying to speak for lionking, but I think that we more or less share the same position: How am I supposed to know one way or the other re Adnan's guilt? How can I possibly ascertain the likely direction of the prosecution going forward?

In these popular "true crime" cases, I think there's the danger of getting over-invested into something that actually has no bearing on our lives and that we have zero influence over. For a lot of people, it's an emotional investment, not a rational one. They get too swept up in their empathy for the victim. Yes, I find this case particularly fascinating and I do hope the truth comes out eventually just because of the basic human empathy I have for the victim and her family. But I am also not going to fool myself into thinking that I am certain about anything or that I have some special insight because I've read so much.

For me, the question of how the case relates to Adnan can be broken down into two parts:
1.) Was his conviction sound?
2.) Was he responsible or not? (i.e did he kill her?)

You seem to be performatively hyper-focused on 1, to the point where when the "better authorities" rule that the conviction was not sound, you no longer want to discuss anything more.
Click to expand...
But doesn't everyone pretty much agree on #1? If we all pretty much agree that, at the very least, there were big problems with the investigation and prosecution, then we necessarily must somewhat agree on #2 -given those problems, how can we possibly have a firm position?

But I do want to discuss more, and I want to discuss question 2. Whether the conviction was sound or not, Adnan may have been responsible.
Click to expand...
This is an unfortunate word, but yeah, that's the "fun" of it all for true-crime fans. It's entertainment, fundamentally. I mean, be real; none of us here are gonna break this thing wide open and none of us have any skin in the game -it's not our lives or careers on the line. I am happy to discuss speculation and play with theories, but there's nothing that we currently know that will suddenly reveal the truth with any certainty.

And if he wasn't then someone was. Do you not care who that might have been? Surely if we found out it was someone else, and we could say so with confidence, that would clear Adnan's name for good, and not just on a technicality, but in the mind of the public as well. Is this apparent insouciance when it comes to who murdered Hae-min Lee genuine or is it a pose?
Click to expand...
If I'm reading lionking correctly and we are indeed somewhat simpatico on this, I would say that it isn't a matter of "caring," who killed Hae. It's a matter of not having enough good, solid information to reach a conclusion coupled with everything that happened in the past weeks. The fact is, he is out, effectively exonerated. That's indeed something that those who are so entirely convinced that he is guilty will have to deal with.
 
After investing countless hours, days, months and attending some of the hearings, I do feel like I have a vested interest in this debacle. Much like the Knox/Sollecito case, it becomes more than a “true crime” hobby. I also put in $1,000.00 as my 3rd of the police file, because I wanted to know what the truth was. I created the HML/WHS scholarship as well. So skin in the game, yeah, I have some.

The bigger issue to me is that a mob of lemmings can subvert justice in this day and age of social media. Whilst this can be a good thing in some cases, we are seeing here the dark side.

Yes, we who are convinced of his guilt will have to deal with it, as you state. I know Syed will have to live this lie for as long as he breathes. He will always wonder if that look he received from that stranger was because s/he knows he did it. He will always remember Hae squeaking out the word, “Why?” as he choked the life out of her. I will live with that.
 
Ampulla of Vater said:
Re: the phone records. If the location information putting Syed at Leakin Park are not valid, consider this - those 2 calls are the only times he is placed there. It is not like that phone picked up that tower at any other time.
Click to expand...
Well, I am not at all conversant with how cell towers in 1999 worked. What I do know is that there are a lot of factors at play -so much so that ATT put a disclaimer on the fax sheet.
Moreover, there was an outgoing call placing Syed at the car’s location, so if incoming is no good, there is an outgoing call.
Click to expand...
I am not seeing how a call can pinpoint him at the car's location. A call pinged off that tower, fine. But calls can ping off towers you would not expect due to a variety of factors.
The disclaimer is for incoming calls that don’t reach the handset. Not for answered calls like the ones referenced in this case. The AT&T coverage maps and drive test maps are in the police file.
Click to expand...
No. The disclaimer reads "Any incoming calls will not be considered reliable information for location." That seems pretty clear that it doesn't matter whether or not incoming calls are answered.

At 3:15 pm there was a 20-second incoming call then an outgoing call to Jen at 3:21. Jay was likely supposed to meet Syed at Best Buy at 3:15pm. Best Buy was covered by the incoming call at 3:15 pm and by the outgoing call at 3:21 pm.
Click to expand...
The high school and Adnan's home are also covered by those calls. And Jay has already recanted the whole Best Buy thing and said the cops fed him that information.
Jay insisted he was at Jen's house until 3:45 pm despite the phone records contradicting it and he testified to it. His insistence on this alibi is most likely due to a fear of taking the wrap for Hae's murder.
Click to expand...
Sure, but the take away from that should be: "Boy, we really can't trust anything Jay says, can we?"

The Nisha call puts Syed and Jay together. She spoke to both of them and testified about the call. At the very least, they were together with the phone at the time. This call has always been a big problem for Syed.
Click to expand...
No, there's no certainty about that at all. The trial transcript shows that Nisha testified that she can't remember when that particular call was. Further, she says it happened at the video store where Jay worked, but Jay didn't work at that store until the end of January. Therefore, it seems unlikely that the 3:32pm call to Nisha was "the call" that is such a problem for Adnan.

This is another problem with the cell calls; none of them match the timeline Jay provided in his trial testimony. If they don't match that, then they can't match the prosecution's case.

The people in the MtV were Bilal and A. Sellers. Bilal was well known to the defense, as well as the prosecution. He testified at the grand jury hearing. He also had no reason to kill Hae, as he didn’t know her.
Click to expand...
That's all true. Which makes it very strange that they didn't follow up on Bilal's threats regarding Hae that were overheard by an informant. Even if they are sure Adnan did it, they should have pursued that lead. Why didn't they?
Sellers, the guy who found the body, took 2 polygraphs and was interviewed.
Click to expand...
I put absolutely no weight on polygraph tests. They are junk science, like so much of forensic science seems to be.
His employment records show him as clocked in at work at that time. He did fail the first polygraph, but he said it was because he was supposed to have met his wife and a real estate agent and was busy taking a polygraph so he was concerned about how much trouble he was in. That is why they retested him at a later date.
Click to expand...
Again, I don't think polygraphs have any value. But if you do -and it's clear the police do- then it makes no sense not to pursue a further investigation against Sellers when he failed the first one. As I understand it, polygraphs work by measuring a baseline level of tension/stress/whatever and then interpret increased stress in response to questions asked as indicative of deception. His stress about meeting a real estate agent would be factored in.

I am glad you are balancing the information. I have the complete, unredacted police file with pictures, but I haven’t uploaded it anywhere, as the 3 of us agreed not to let the exhumation photos out into the interwebs. If there is anything that is redacted that you wonder about, I probably have it unredacted.

I am so disgusted by this innocence fraud because I have watched for 8 years while Chaudry has thrown everything at the wall to get something to stick. This includes victim blaming, altering official records to suit her agenda, and outright lying. Appeal after appeal failed. She has become a wealthy woman from this case and she is a vile human being. Cross her and she will send her Twitter army to destroy you. I have received death threats. I completely believe Syed choked the life out of Hae and honestly, I think she knows it.
Click to expand...

I have not involved myself to this extent, lol. I fully understand that all the players have their motives and thus, biases. This is something to be factored in when evaluating what they have to say.
 
Ampulla of Vater said:
Yes, we who are convinced of his guilt will have to deal with it, as you state. I know Syed will have to live this lie for as long as he breathes. He will always wonder if that look he received from that stranger was because s/he knows he did it. He will always remember Hae squeaking out the word, “Why?” as he choked the life out of her. I will live with that.
Click to expand...

In my view, such absolute certainty has no place in a skeptical forum.
 
First of all, let me just say that nothing I said about true crime fans or whatever, was meant to apply to anyone in particular, just a general observation.

Ampulla of Vater said:
After investing countless hours, days, months and attending some of the hearings, I do feel like I have a vested interest in this debacle. Much like the Knox/Sollecito case, it becomes more than a “true crime” hobby. I also put in $1,000.00 as my 3rd of the police file, because I wanted to know what the truth was. I created the HML/WHS scholarship as well. So skin in the game, yeah, I have some.
Click to expand...
I just can't understand this. I am indeed fascinated by the case (and a few others), I just can't imagine ever getting so deep that I'm setting up scholarships for the victim or paying big money to get access to files. Not knocking you or anything, it's just such a foreign idea to me. I don't know the victim or the accused. I don't live in Baltimore. It's just a really good story -that's the extent of my "care" about this, beyond basic human empathy for the victim and her family.

The bigger issue to me is that a mob of lemmings can subvert justice in this day and age of social media. Whilst this can be a good thing in some cases, we are seeing here the dark side.
Click to expand...
It's hard for me to see a dark side when it comes to ensuring that accused people get a fair shake from the police and investigators, adequate representation and a fair trial. I don't think there's much doubt that the investigators and the prosecution botched this case. If that's true, then regardless of anything else, Adnan was rightly released.
 
Jeffrey Archer noted in his prison diaries that lifers were the most placid inmates, those that killed a spouse. Talk about act in haste repent at leisure. I believe the stats on recidivism show negligible danger to the community. Let us follow the "guilty" Syed going forward.
 
xjx388 said:
First of all, let me just say that nothing I said about true crime fans or whatever, was meant to apply to anyone in particular, just a general observation.

I just can't understand this. I am indeed fascinated by the case (and a few others), I just can't imagine ever getting so deep that I'm setting up scholarships for the victim or paying big money to get access to files. Not knocking you or anything, it's just such a foreign idea to me. I don't know the victim or the accused. I don't live in Baltimore. It's just a really good story -that's the extent of my "care" about this, beyond basic human empathy for the victim and her family.

It's hard for me to see a dark side when it comes to ensuring that accused people get a fair shake from the police and investigators, adequate representation and a fair trial. I don't think there's much doubt that the investigators and the prosecution botched this case. If that's true, then regardless of anything else, Adnan was rightly released.
Click to expand...

Well, it happened where I grew up. My kids even knew about the body farm called Leakin Park, as we passed by it and talked about it every time we would go to the zoo. There is actually a map of all the bodies that have been found there.

I also remember 1/13/1999 well. I remember it because of the impending ice storm. My employees were already talking about calling out of work. I actually remember driving right by the Best Buy on that very evening on my way home, as I was speaking to my office manager on my car phone, which is really weird.

The scholarship was to put good energy into a bad situation. The Intercept even donated and it all went to Woodlawn High School.

With the exception of a few cases, this being one, I am like you. I am a distant observer of cases. I am really a court junkie more than anything. I think it is just fascinating to watch the prosecution and the defense put on their respective “show” while staying within the laws of evidence, in order to prove their case. I have always been a trial watcher, at least since OJ. I have even been in contact with a best-selling author because I watched and kept detailed notes on a 5-month trial she is writing about. I dunno; everyone has to have a hobby.

I don’t think the investigators or the prosecution botched this case. Several people, including Koenig, have said it was a decent investigation. Chaudry has just turned every little ridiculous nothing burger she could find into a huge conspiracy so she could free Syed.
 
Randall Adams and Russ Faria

angrysoba said:
And it is here again, that the alternatives are only half-heartedly put forward. It seems nobody really wants to come to any firm conclusions. Maybe Mr S, maybe Bilal, maybe Jay, maybe Don. Better yet, maybe some mashed together composite culprit. Why do advocates for Adnan's innocence not have a firm suspect? Because they don't really believe it. If they had to deal with the idea that Adnan is innocent, based on "reasonable doubt", they would have massive cognitive dissonance trying to come up with a different suspect.

Let's take Jay. Let's assume the reason he knew where the car was was because he murdered Hae-min Lee and disposed of the body. None of the problems with the car are solved. Why is it that the car had grass under it? Oh, maybe Jay was driving it around after the murder. That makes sense! Why did the cops want to arrest Adnan more than Jay? Oh, because Jay was trying to get out of a drug dealing charge... hey, wait? So, the cops decided to fit up Adnan instead of a black drug dealer who they actually suspected of doing the crime? And in order to make it fit, they ran the risk of coaching him and telling him to implicate an innocent man?

Similarly, why bother trying to protect Mr S, apparently not a particualrly savoury figure to begin with, or Bilal (when if the motive was Islamaphobia, they hardly needed to go to Adnan). Apparently Adnan was a upright citizen. A pillar of the community. The other suspects were not. So why frame Adnan?
?
Click to expand...
The cases of Randall Dale Adams and especially Russ Faria come to mind as instances where the police attempted to fit up an innocent suspect while ignoring the obvious and guilty one, David Ray Harris and Pamela Hupp, respectively. But just because it can happen does not mean that it did happen in this instance (I am still inclined toward his guilt).
EDT
""There was a credible alibi witness who was with Adnan at the precise time of the murder, and now the Court of Appeals has said that witness would not have affected the outcome of the proceeding," Brown told the Baltimore Sun. "We think just the opposite is true. From the perspective of the defendant, there is no stronger evidence than an alibi witness."" link

This is nonsense. Juries often ignore alibi witnesses (sometimes wrongly so). The linked article has a pro-innocence bias IMO.
 
Last edited:
Ampulla of Vater said:
Well, it happened where I grew up.
<SNIP for brevity>
Click to expand...
I guess if it happened close to me, I might be compelled to be a bit more invested. I don't know . . .
The scholarship was to put good energy into a bad situation. The Intercept even donated and it all went to Woodlawn High School.
Click to expand...
That's actually pretty great!

With the exception of a few cases, this being one, I am like you. I am a distant observer of cases. I am really a court junkie more than anything. I think it is just fascinating to watch the prosecution and the defense put on their respective “show” while staying within the laws of evidence, in order to prove their case. I have always been a trial watcher, at least since OJ.
Click to expand...
There were two things I wanted to be when I grew up: A lawyer and a writer/journalist. Neither happened but that's where my interest in the genre springs from.
I don’t think the investigators or the prosecution botched this case. Several people, including Koenig, have said it was a decent investigation. Chaudry has just turned every little ridiculous nothing burger she could find into a huge conspiracy so she could free Syed.
Click to expand...
Again, I understand that Rabia is biased and so we can't take everything she says at face value. But independent of anything she says there are a few things that have come out since 1999/2000 that illustrate the reason I say the investigation was botched:

They did not thoroughly investigate Bilal. Even if they believed Adnan was the killer, it's possible other people were involved. Someone so close to Adnan -the dude who bought Adnan's phone the day before the killing!- should have been looked at closer. They even had the tip about him making threats against Hae and just seem to have ignored it. It's strange to me... And now we know Bilal was a predator and all-around shady dude.

Jay's story was obviously heavily influenced by the cops and their need to tie the story to the cell phone records -which they over-relied on. At trial, the story Jay testified to was off from the records by an hour, which I think is a huge discrepancy that the prosecution glossed over (and wasn't attacked by the defense) and essentially forced it to fit.

Once they got the anonymous tip to "look at the ex-boyfriend," it seems they got tunnel vision and just zeroed in on that. And then we have Ritz's misconduct in several cases that resulted in releases -that puts a bad light on his work in this case.

They were unable to develop any physical evidence tying Adnan to the murder. Things that you would expect to be present were not: Hae's hair, DNA, etc in the trunk of her car or in Adnan's car. Soil from the murder location in Hae's or Adnan's car. Adnan's DNA on her body. And then of course, there were things that were present that were overlooked. Somehow, they failed to test DNA that they really should have -the shoes, for one. I don't think they even tested her rape kit at the time of the investigation (I could be wrong about that). And I don't buy the argument, "Well DNA testing wasn't that advanced." Not true, the DNA proved OJ did it in 1994/1995. The fingerprint on the mirror that didn't belong to Hae, Jay or Adnan was somehow missed or overlooked.

There's just too much. That isn't information from Rabia, that's information in the public domain.

I have a question: Do you have in the Investigation file the note regarding Bilal's threats re: Hae? If you don't, I would find that very interesting.
 
Ampulla of Vater said:
What do you think the odds are of someone's cell phone bill showing two pings in a park on the exact same day that someone's ex-girlfriend goes missing and is found six weeks later buried in the park where the pings occurred? Let's say the cellphone pings may have been wrong. How unlucky must one be to have your ex-girlfriend get murdered and buried where your cell phone erroneously pings on the exact same date?

Let's add to that unluckiness that your buddy tells the cops you killed your ex-girlfriend and required help with burying her body and stashing her car and that buddy leads cops to the abandoned car, the car that the cops hired helicopters to try and find just a day or two prior.

Let's add just one more thing, although there are many. The day your ex-girlfriend goes missing right after school and ends up murdered is the same day three people hear you ask her for a ride somewhere after school.

Not guilty... I don't think so.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup:

Adnan is as guilty as sin.

This entire saga is a truly frightening and depressing demonstration of the power of framing, media, and preying upon the instincts some people have to gravitate toward anti-police / anti-justice system narratives, or narratives that portray anyone from a foreign background as innocent / downtrodden, etc.

The fact that this murderer is now released, when he should've been executed over 20 years ago, is pathetic.

This man deprived that poor young woman and her family of so much. If he had a shred of decency, he'd confess to what he did and perform the one beneficial service he's capable of at this point: closure for the family and a much needed reality-slap for all the people who bought into the idea of his innocence.
 
Syed gets job at Georgetown U.
And in yet another twist to a saga publicized in 2014 in the true-crime podcast “Serial,” Syed has landed a full-time job with Georgetown as a program associate for the university’s Prisons and Justice Initiative. Its programs include education and training for incarcerated individuals and others who have left prison.
....
In October, prosecutors dropped the criminal case against Syed, saying that he was wrongly convicted of murder. After new forensic testing of evidence found no trace of Syed’s DNA, prosecutors said they would not keep pursuing the case against Syed.
Click to expand...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/12/23/adnan-syed-georgetown-hire-conviction/
 
catsmate said:
: rolleyes :
Oh look, slandering an exonerated man.....
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say the man was exonerated so much as the system was indicted.

Besides, from OJ Simpson to Donald Trump, this community has no problem "slandering" an "exonerated" man. Why should Syed be exempt from the court of public opinion? Nobody else is.
 
Well, Quillette have an article out arguing that Syed was wrongfully exonerated and pointed out the weird legal situation in which he is free and the prosecution are no longer interested in him, while at the same time the courts have reinstated the murder conviction.

Link
 
For me, this is pretty much what makes it case closed:

Jenn said that in mid-January, possibly the 13th, she had hung out with Jay in the afternoon smoking dope and playing video games with her brother (like many of the teenage witnesses in this case, Jenn was a regular marijuana smoker). She later received a page from an unknown number. When she called back, someone besides Jay answered and said Jay was busy and would return her call when he was ready to be picked up. Jay later paged Jenn, asking her to meet him at Westview Mall. When she drove out to the mall on the evening of the 13th, Adnan and Jay arrived in a car Jenn did not recognize, driven by Adnan. Soon after Jay got into Jenn’s car, he told her that Adnan had strangled Hae. Jay told Jenn that he had then gone with Adnan to Leakin Park, where he had watched Adnan bury Hae’s body. Jay urged Jenn to say nothing about this. She then drove to a dumpster behind Westview Mall and watched Jay throw one (or possibly two) shovels into it. They later returned to Westview so Jay could check there were no prints left on them.

Detectives now knew two crucial facts. First, Jenn knew how Hae had been killed, something she could not have learned from reading media reports of the investigation. Second, Jay was deeply involved in Hae’s disappearance. Jenn told detectives that after she had spoken to them on February 26th, she had called Jay. Jay told her to tell the detectives the truth, then send them to interview him. The detectives lost no time, accosting Jay at 11.30pm on February 27th at his workplace, an adult video store. Jay agreed to talk to police without a lawyer, and in the recorded part of this interview, he told detectives the first of several versions of what happened on January 13th. (The first three of these accounts are compared in a graphic on the Serial website.)

In his first version, recited in the early morning hours of February 28th, Jay told police that Adnan had called him at 10.45am on the morning of the day Hae disappeared. He offered to let Jay use his car and phone while Adnan was at school. For most of the afternoon, Jay hung out with Jenn playing video games and smoking marijuana. At 3.45pm, Adnan called and asked Jay to meet him at Edmonson Avenue in Baltimore. Jay arrived to find Adnan with Hae’s car. Adnan popped the trunk and showed Jay Hae’s body. Adnan and Jay then drove in separate cars to a nearby “Park and Ride” lot near highway I-70, where they left Hae’s car. Jay then dropped Adnan off at Woodlawn for track practice (around 4.30pm) and picked him up again afterward. They went to eat at a McDonald’s, where a cop called Adnan. The pair then collected a pick and shovel from Jay’s grandmother’s house and drove to where they had left Hae’s car near I-70.

With Adnan driving Hae’s car and Jay driving Adnan’s car, they drove to Leakin Park, where Adnan buried Hae. Jay accurately identified the clothes Hae had been wearing when she left school. This was important: Jay was no longer a Woodlawn student, so he would not have had the chance to see Hae leave that day. Jay (in Adnan’s car) and Adnan (in Hae’s car) then drove around looking for a place to dump Hae’s car. After some false starts, Adnan decided on a vacant lot surrounded by rowhouses. Detectives asked Jay where this lot was. He could not recall an address, but said (22p): “It’s like … in the back of a bunch of row homes on like a parking lot … on the west side of Baltimore city.” Detectives asked Jay to ride with them and show them Hae’s car right then, in the early hours of February 28th. Jay led them to a vacant lot near 300 Edgewood Street in Baltimore, where police secured Hae’s 1998 Nissan Sentra.
Click to expand...

Clearly Jay and Jenn knew what had happened. Either that meant that one or both were responsible or it was Adnan. Adnan seems the most likely.

The people who support Adnan seem to have a number of bad faith arguments that sound almost like vaguely asserting it may have been "some Peurto Rican guy". Or working very hard to amplify any doubts.

But ultimately they have no idea who else could have done it, and apparently don't care. This smacks of bad faith in the same way anyone who wanted O.J Simpson to get off has no interest in looking for the real perpetrators. They know full well who the actual killer is but don't want to answer that question.
 
I still want to know why it is that those resting on the judgment of "better authorities than you or I [sic]" who apparently invested a lot of their time listening to Serial and maybe even more pro-Syed podcasts and documentaries, are suddenly aggressively incurious. Not only do they apparently seem completely satisifed now that Adnan Syed is released, but they don't care one bit who the real murderer may be.

Maybe it was that guy who found him because, you know the polygraph thing, or maybe it was Don, which would make sense because the police could have framed the Muslim guy to protect a white guy, or maybe it was some other Muslim guy that the police were presumably protecting because....I dunno... look it's not important! All that is important is to inject doubt into the proceedings. Look at me! The true skeptic! Now watch me bury my head in the sand and demand everyone else does the same.
 
Speaking of libel laws, I would assume it could be considered defamatory to accuse an "innocent man" of murder, right?

But the writer of the Quilette piece is doing just that...

His friend Jay Wilds helped him bury Hae's body in Leakin Park, as confirmed by cell phone records which (unlike what you may have heard) are reliable. Jay and his friend Jenn P. chose to voluntarily confess their involvement to police.

They did so without knowing whether Adnan had given police an alibi. If he had, Jay would have been charged with murder and Jenn, at a minimum, with being an accessory after the fact. They literally staked their futures on their knowledge that Adnan was guilty.

Jay led detectives to the place where he had seen Adnan park Hae's car after the burial, which corroborates Jay's testimony and rules out any version of the crime with a third party -- unless that third party collaborated with Jay in killing Hae for some unknown reason.

Adnan has never provided an alibi for the crucial time window and never will. At first, he offered 80 alibi witnesses from the school and the mosque, but none of them testified at his trial except his father, and then only hesitantly.

In fact, Adnan *knew* he had no alibi, which is why, according to his own sworn testimony, he urged his own lawyer to try to get a plea bargain from prosecutors, a fact skimmed over or ignored in all partisan documentaries about the case.

You read that right: Despite promising 80 alibi witness *and* having both of Asia's letters since March 1999, Adnan, facing trial in December 1999, was willing to accept decades in prison for a crime he now claims he didn't commit.

he partisan podcasts and media coverage of the case have convinced millions that the evidence against Adnan was "shaky" & and that someone else may have killed Hae. There is no basis for either belief. It's a textbook case of partisan journalism distorting the truth.

Around the world, millions of people have been convinced that police are hunting for "alternate suspects". They aren't. Nobody else will ever be charged for Hae's murder, period. The reason is that the evidence against Adnan was compelling.
Click to expand...

Link

So... is Adnan Syed going to start suing people who assert that he was the murderer? Is he bollocks.

Come on, Syed fans. Just admit it. You'll feel better and the cognitive dissonance will dissipate. Syed was the murderer, wasn't he! It should have been pretty obvious even while listening to Serial. I think that even Sarah Koenig knows that Adnan did it.
 
angrysoba said:
Well, Quillette have an article out arguing that Syed was wrongfully exonerated and pointed out the weird legal situation in which he is free and the prosecution are no longer interested in him, while at the same time the courts have reinstated the murder conviction.

Link
Click to expand...

The whole issue with the reinstatement of the conviction is a procedural one. The courts should have notified the next of kin of the victim that the conviction was being quashed ahead of time and they didn't. So it had to be temporarily reinstated to allow the courts notify the next of kin and then re-vacate it. The conviction will be gone at the next hearing.

I'm not reading the quillette article, not giving a hate group internet traffic.
 
Andrew Hammel's long form article

Andrew Hammel wrote, "First, Jay must have recognized Hae’s nondescript car parked among other similar cars as he drove by a random vacant lot. Then, he did not tell anyone, even after Hae’s body was found and the car was advertised as key evidence in a murder case. This silence not only hindered a murder investigation of someone Jay knew, it also cost him thousands of dollars. An American organisation called “Crime Stoppers” rewards tipsters who help solve crimes. It’s all anonymous: Crime Stoppers keeps no records and pays tipsters with untraceable cash. So why would Jay, a poor kid who worked minimum-wage jobs, pass up a risk-free, tax-free windfall?"

From a discussion elsewhere, I was under the impression that Jay probably received about $3000 from crime stoppers, but that discussion board has gone defunct.

"An even less plausible explanation for Jay’s knowledge is a police conspiracy, which would have had to unfold something like this: Cops found Hae’s car at some point and simply left it there. Off the record, they told Jay where the car was, then ordered him to pretend that he was giving this information to the police rather than vice versa when they restarted the recording. According to this theory, Jay may either be the real killer (intent on framing Adnan) or he knew nothing about the crime at all. But why would police leave a car full of evidence in a murder case sitting in an unsecured vacant lot, where it might be stolen or vandalized? Presumably to protect the “real” killer and pin the blame on Adnan. But who was that killer, and why would police want to protect him (or her)?"

The above paragraph makes some fair points, and I agree that the DNA on the shoes was not very probative. Overall, Mr. Hammel provides a cogent and detailed article. Yet it might have been even a better one if it had explained to those of us in the cheap seats why a scenario in which Jay killed Hae without Adnan is "logically impossible." I am also unclear on what caused Jay to flip. In addition, Mr. Hammel seems not at all bothered when the police make a deal with one criminal in order to pursue another criminal who may be no more or even less culpable than the first one. Offhand the only example I can provide is the Richard Glossip case, in which the man who bludgeoned Mr. Van Treese to death ended up with a lighter sentence than Mr. Glossip, who might well have been an accessory after the fact.
 
Chris_Halkides said:
Andrew Hammel wrote, "First, Jay must have recognized Hae’s nondescript car parked among other similar cars as he drove by a random vacant lot. Then, he did not tell anyone, even after Hae’s body was found and the car was advertised as key evidence in a murder case. This silence not only hindered a murder investigation of someone Jay knew, it also cost him thousands of dollars. An American organisation called “Crime Stoppers” rewards tipsters who help solve crimes. It’s all anonymous: Crime Stoppers keeps no records and pays tipsters with untraceable cash. So why would Jay, a poor kid who worked minimum-wage jobs, pass up a risk-free, tax-free windfall?"

From a discussion elsewhere, I was under the impression that Jay probably received about $3000 from crime stoppers, but that discussion board has gone defunct.

"An even less plausible explanation for Jay’s knowledge is a police conspiracy, which would have had to unfold something like this: Cops found Hae’s car at some point and simply left it there. Off the record, they told Jay where the car was, then ordered him to pretend that he was giving this information to the police rather than vice versa when they restarted the recording. According to this theory, Jay may either be the real killer (intent on framing Adnan) or he knew nothing about the crime at all. But why would police leave a car full of evidence in a murder case sitting in an unsecured vacant lot, where it might be stolen or vandalized? Presumably to protect the “real” killer and pin the blame on Adnan. But who was that killer, and why would police want to protect him (or her)?"

The above paragraph makes some fair points, and I agree that the DNA on the shoes was not very probative. Overall, Mr. Hammel provides a cogent and detailed article. Yet it might have been even a better one if it had explained to those of us in the cheap seats why a scenario in which Jay killed Hae without Adnan is "logically impossible." I am also unclear on what caused Jay to flip. In addition, Mr. Hammel seems not at all bothered when the police make a deal with one criminal in order to pursue another criminal who may be no more or even less culpable than the first one. Offhand the only example I can provide is the Richard Glossip case, in which the man who bludgeoned Mr. Van Treese to death ended up with a lighter sentence than Mr. Glossip, who might well have been an accessory after the fact.
Click to expand...
From even cheaper seats I recall being persuaded that Adnan Syed could not have done the crime, from a variety of material.
The comparison to Glossip is interesting, but with the proviso. Sneed had a propensity for tall tales, and Glossip was in crying wolf mode. There was a body inside while he helped repair a window from outside.
I hope there is sense somewhere in my post.
In other words, an accessory must know there is a crime preceding.
 
Last edited:
Gulliver Foyle said:
The whole issue with the reinstatement of the conviction is a procedural one. The courts should have notified the next of kin of the victim that the conviction was being quashed ahead of time and they didn't. So it had to be temporarily reinstated to allow the courts notify the next of kin and then re-vacate it. The conviction will be gone at the next hearing.

I'm not reading the quillette article, not giving a hate group internet traffic.
Click to expand...
It makes a change from them whining about "woke" Beethoven.
 
Chris_Halkides said:
Andrew Hammel wrote, <snip>

"An even less plausible explanation for Jay’s knowledge is a police conspiracy, which would have had to unfold something like this: Cops found Hae’s car at some point and simply left it there. Off the record, they told Jay where the car was, then ordered him to pretend that he was giving this information to the police rather than vice versa when they restarted the recording. According to this theory, Jay may either be the real killer (intent on framing Adnan) or he knew nothing about the crime at all. But why would police leave a car full of evidence in a murder case sitting in an unsecured vacant lot, where it might be stolen or vandalized? Presumably to protect the “real” killer and pin the blame on Adnan. But who was that killer, and why would police want to protect him (or her)?"

The above paragraph makes some fair points, and I agree that the DNA on the shoes was not very probative. Overall, Mr. Hammel provides a cogent and detailed article. Yet it might have been even a better one if it had explained to those of us in the cheap seats why a scenario in which Jay killed Hae without Adnan is "logically impossible." I am also unclear on what caused Jay to flip. In addition, Mr. Hammel seems not at all bothered when the police make a deal with one criminal in order to pursue another criminal who may be no more or even less culpable than the first one. Offhand the only example I can provide is the Richard Glossip case, in which the man who bludgeoned Mr. Van Treese to death ended up with a lighter sentence than Mr. Glossip, who might well have been an accessory after the fact.
Click to expand...

The cops really didn’t know where the car was located, as they were petitioning for helicopters to aid in the search per the MPIA.

What caused Jay to flip was the police received Adnan’s cell phone records showing calls to Pusateri’s residence (by Jay - Jenn was Jay’s friend) on the day Hae went missing. They showed up at Jenn’s looking for information. Jenn obtained a lawyer and went to the station and told them all she knew, which led them to Jay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom