Adnan Syed - Serial / Undisclosed

lionking said:
To all those maintaining that Adnan is guilty as hell, why has his conviction been voided? I do not think it’s because the justice system is feeling sorry for him.

I’m going for this:
Click to expand...

Why don't you go for the competing explanation, which is that the prosecution failed to uphold Adnan's right to due process, in securing their conviction? Guilty people get their convictions overturned all the time, because the prosecution didn't do their job properly.

The DNA is a red herring, since the conviction has never rested on the DNA evidence, and the DNA being tested is not from things that would prove Adnan did not kill her if his DNA is not found on them. Why are you so convinced he's innocent?
 
I don’t see how anyone can be “convinced” either way 100% with the totality of the information we know of; there are huge question marks around much of it.

Ritz’s misconduct in other cases casts a pall over this case.

Jay’s ever changing story may have some core consistencies, but if he’s lying about a lot of it, how can you trust any of it?

Unreliability of cell phone records means you can’t put too much stock in tower pings.

The failure to look seriously at alternate suspects means we have no idea what was missed.

The most convincing, solid information we have is that Jay took the cops to the car. This only shows that Jay knew where the car was.

Moderately convincing information is that other people have said that Jay told them about burying the body with Adnan. This only shows that Jay told people stuff.

Without Jay’s words, the police have nothing else connecting Adnan (or anyone else for that matter) to the crime. Zilch. Jay’s words to the police and others are not at all probative and have changed so much over the years that they aren’t even reliable.

So no…I don’t understand how anyone can be certain that Adnan is guilty. I understand thinking it’s possible or even probable. But “no doubt?”
 
xjx388 said:
I don’t see how anyone can be “convinced” either way 100% with the totality of the information we know of; there are huge question marks around much of it.

Ritz’s misconduct in other cases casts a pall over this case.

Jay’s ever changing story may have some core consistencies, but if he’s lying about a lot of it, how can you trust any of it?

Unreliability of cell phone records means you can’t put too much stock in tower pings.

The failure to look seriously at alternate suspects means we have no idea what was missed.

The most convincing, solid information we have is that Jay took the cops to the car. This only shows that Jay knew where the car was.

Moderately convincing information is that other people have said that Jay told them about burying the body with Adnan. This only shows that Jay told people stuff.

Without Jay’s words, the police have nothing else connecting Adnan (or anyone else for that matter) to the crime. Zilch. Jay’s words to the police and others are not at all probative and have changed so much over the years that they aren’t even reliable.

So no…I don’t understand how anyone can be certain that Adnan is guilty. I understand thinking it’s possible or even probable. But “no doubt?”
Click to expand...
I thought he was innocent after a netflix show, but talk is of a podcast.
Are they the same?
And it is better for public safety that guilty walk free than innocent are jailed. I have seen first hand how the latter ruins countless lives connected to the innocent, and that cost is ignored by the public and judiciary until it is their life's turn.
 
Last edited:
Samson said:
I thought he was innocent after a netflix show, but talk is of a podcast.
Are they the same?
And it is better for public safety that guilty walk free than innocent are jailed. I have seen first hand how the latter ruins countless lives connected to the innocent, and that cost is ignored by the public and judiciary until it is their life's turn.
Click to expand...

There was an HBO show,"The Case Against Adnan Syed." Before that was the Serial podcast and then the Undisclosed podcast. Those are the three major pieces of media people talk about in re this case.
 
theprestige said:
Why don't you go for the competing explanation, which is that the prosecution failed to uphold Adnan's right to due process, in securing their conviction? Guilty people get their convictions overturned all the time, because the prosecution didn't do their job properly.

The DNA is a red herring, since the conviction has never rested on the DNA evidence, and the DNA being tested is not from things that would prove Adnan did not kill her if his DNA is not found on them. Why are you so convinced he's innocent?
Click to expand...

Where have I ever said he was innocent? I do not believe he is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. There is a world of difference between the two things.
 
xjx388 said:
I don’t see how anyone can be “convinced” either way 100% with the totality of the information we know of; there are huge question marks around much of it.

Ritz’s misconduct in other cases casts a pall over this case.

Jay’s ever changing story may have some core consistencies, but if he’s lying about a lot of it, how can you trust any of it?

Unreliability of cell phone records means you can’t put too much stock in tower pings.

The failure to look seriously at alternate suspects means we have no idea what was missed.

The most convincing, solid information we have is that Jay took the cops to the car. This only shows that Jay knew where the car was.

Moderately convincing information is that other people have said that Jay told them about burying the body with Adnan. This only shows that Jay told people stuff.

Without Jay’s words, the police have nothing else connecting Adnan (or anyone else for that matter) to the crime. Zilch. Jay’s words to the police and others are not at all probative and have changed so much over the years that they aren’t even reliable.

So no…I don’t understand how anyone can be certain that Adnan is guilty. I understand thinking it’s possible or even probable. But “no doubt?”
Click to expand...

It’s not just Jay’s testimony. It is the fact that he knew where the car was. Now, we can hypothesize why that is, but anything beyond he knew it because he and Adnan buried Hae-min Lee brings in all kinds of greater difficulties to explain.

It really makes no sense that Jay had implicated Adnan and that he has maintained that ever since. Now that the police have been implicated as lying will Jay say “yeah, they tricked me into it” or that they threatened him?

Also, given that he admitted to being part of it, and knowing where the car was why would the police take an extra step of trying to implicate someone else if they had a person right there who they could fit up. A black drug dealer no less! They had his confession about being involved.

I mean how does it make sense that they didn’t just fit up Jay if they wanted?
 
angrysoba said:
It’s not just Jay’s testimony. It is the fact that he knew where the car was. Now, we can hypothesize why that is, but anything beyond he knew it because he and Adnan buried Hae-min Lee brings in all kinds of greater difficulties to explain.
Click to expand...
Yes, Jay knowing the location of the car is THE one fact that is solid in this case. But we cannot be at all sure of WHY he knew where the car was. We know what he said but I think it’s pretty well established that we can’t really trust 100% of what he says.

I don’t think there’s anything difficult to explain with simple alternate theories on why he knew. The simplest one is that Jay was involved in the murder or the cover up of the murder. But this says nothing at all about Adnan’s involvement, we only have Jay’s word on that one. But if Adnan wasn’t involved, that means Jay knows who was involved. Perhaps he was scared of that person at the time and fingered Adnan instead. OR: Jay did it alone and fingered Adnan to get himself off the hook. Those two alternatives don’t create any more difficulty.

It really makes no sense that Jay had implicated Adnan and that he has maintained that ever since. Now that the police have been implicated as lying will Jay say “yeah, they tricked me into it” or that they threatened him?
Click to expand...
It makes sense to implicate Adnan if Jay has a reason to hide who actually did it.

And Jay has already said the police fed him the Best Buy location in an interview with The Intercept.

I think Jay has to maintain the story at this point. If he withheld the name of the real killer and fingered Adnan, then he committed perjury and sent an innocent man to jail for 23 years. There goes whatever immunity he had, not to mention blowback in his life and to his family.

Also, given that he admitted to being part of it, and knowing where the car was why would the police take an extra step of trying to implicate someone else if they had a person right there who they could fit up. A black drug dealer no less! They had his confession about being involved.
Click to expand...
But not to the murder. They slapped his wrist for the accessory charges in return for his testimony. They also overlooked his admitted drug dealing.

I mean how does it make sense that they didn’t just fit up Jay if they wanted?
Click to expand...

Incompetence. They gave Jay way too much benefit of the doubt and didn’t look beyond it when they should have.
 
xjx388 said:
Yes, Jay knowing the location of the car is THE one fact that is solid in this case. But we cannot be at all sure of WHY he knew where the car was. We know what he said but I think it’s pretty well established that we can’t really trust 100% of what he says.

I don’t think there’s anything difficult to explain with simple alternate theories on why he knew. The simplest one is that Jay was involved in the murder or the cover up of the murder. But this says nothing at all about Adnan’s involvement, we only have Jay’s word on that one. But if Adnan wasn’t involved, that means Jay knows who was involved. Perhaps he was scared of that person at the time and fingered Adnan instead. OR: Jay did it alone and fingered Adnan to get himself off the hook. Those two alternatives don’t create any more difficulty.

It makes sense to implicate Adnan if Jay has a reason to hide who actually did it.

And Jay has already said the police fed him the Best Buy location in an interview with The Intercept.

I think Jay has to maintain the story at this point. If he withheld the name of the real killer and fingered Adnan, then he committed perjury and sent an innocent man to jail for 23 years. There goes whatever immunity he had, not to mention blowback in his life and to his family.

But not to the murder. They slapped his wrist for the accessory charges in return for his testimony. They also overlooked his admitted drug dealing.


Incompetence. They gave Jay way too much benefit of the doubt and didn’t look beyond it when they should have.
Click to expand...

Jay also told Jenn on the night of the 13th what had happened. Jenn was the first one to be approached by the police when Syed’s phone records showed her number. Jay had Syed’s phone and car on the 13th so when Jay and his friend Jenn exchanged calls, it showed up on the cell phone bill. When the cops contacted Jenn, she told her mother what she knew. Mom hired a lawyer and the three of them went and told the cops everything she knew from Jay. This included where Hae was buried and the position she was in. Then the cops interviewed Jay who told them the same things, as well as where the car had been parked.

Jay had zero motive to kill Hae. Remember, it was Syed who was possessive per Hae’s diary and it was Hae who wrote a letter to Syed about their breakup and how he was not taking it well. The night before, while Syed attempted to call Hae, she was out with her new guy. When she finally returned home and answered one of Syed’s calls, she spent less than 2 minutes on the phone with him and flipped back over to talking to her new guy. Hae had moved on.

You are getting your information from Undisclosed and the HBO documentary. Both of those have the involvement of Rabia Chaudry. She is the older sister of Syed’s best friend, Saad. They are solely innocence propaganda pieces of media. At least temper it with some information from the other side.

And don’t forget to look at the police file I linked and read the court transcripts. It is only fair to spend just as much time looking at the information that lead to his conviction. That police file cost over $2k to obtain. It is lengthy.
 
xjx388 said:
I don’t see how anyone can be “convinced” either way 100% with the totality of the information we know of; there are huge question marks around much of it.

Ritz’s misconduct in other cases casts a pall over this case.

Jay’s ever changing story may have some core consistencies, but if he’s lying about a lot of it, how can you trust any of it?

Unreliability of cell phone records means you can’t put too much stock in tower pings.

The failure to look seriously at alternate suspects means we have no idea what was missed.

The most convincing, solid information we have is that Jay took the cops to the car. This only shows that Jay knew where the car was.

Moderately convincing information is that other people have said that Jay told them about burying the body with Adnan. This only shows that Jay told people stuff.

Without Jay’s words, the police have nothing else connecting Adnan (or anyone else for that matter) to the crime. Zilch. Jay’s words to the police and others are not at all probative and have changed so much over the years that they aren’t even reliable.

So no…I don’t understand how anyone can be certain that Adnan is guilty. I understand thinking it’s possible or even probable. But “no doubt?”
Click to expand...

So let’s talk about these 2 things first.

Why are the cellphone records unreliable?

What alternative suspects are you contending they did NOT look into?
 
Ampulla of Vater said:
Jay also told Jenn on the night of the 13th what had happened.
Click to expand...
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.

Jenn was the first one to be approached by the police when Syed’s phone records showed her number. Jay had Syed’s phone and car on the 13th so when Jay and his friend Jenn exchanged calls, it showed up on the cell phone bill.
Click to expand...
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.

When the cops contacted Jenn, she told her mother what she knew. Mom hired a lawyer and the three of them went and told the cops everything she knew from Jay. This included where Hae was buried and the position she was in. Then the cops interviewed Jay who told them the same things, as well as where the car had been parked.
Click to expand...
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.

Jay had zero motive to kill Hae.
Click to expand...
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.
Remember, it was Syed who was possessive per Hae’s diary and it was Hae who wrote a letter to Syed about their breakup and how he was not taking it well. The night before, while Syed attempted to call Hae, she was out with her new guy. When she finally returned home and answered one of Syed’s calls, she spent less than 2 minutes on the phone with him and flipped back over to talking to her new guy. Hae had moved on.
Click to expand...
Yes. This establishes a motive for Adnan to kill her. This does not prove he killed her though.

You are getting your information from Undisclosed and the HBO documentary. Both of those have the involvement of Rabia Chaudry. She is the older sister of Syed’s best friend, Saad. They are solely innocence propaganda pieces of media. At least temper it with some information from the other side.

And don’t forget to look at the police file I linked and read the court transcripts. It is only fair to spend just as much time looking at the information that lead to his conviction. That police file cost over $2k to obtain. It is lengthy.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Ampulla of Vater said:
So let’s talk about these 2 things first.

Why are the cellphone records unreliable?
Click to expand...
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.

What alternative suspects are you contending they did NOT look into?
Click to expand...
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.
 
nails versus nail debris

Nails themselves are a good source of DNA for identification long after death. "Among the analyzed tissue types, nails were proved as the most suitable for DNA-based identification of putrefied bodies." But of course it is the debris underneath nails that is useful in identifying a suspect, and I have yet to find information on the question of how long the DNA remains useful. My working hypothesis is that with mold come nucleases, enzymes that degrade DNA or RNA. If the area underneath her nails was moldy, then I suspect no useful results would be forthcoming.

Maybe nothing would have been found if it had been tested immediately, but it was still odd that it took over twenty years to do so. Why clip them if you are not going to swab them? If Mr. Syed's DNA had been found there, I would be certain of his guilt BARD. If someone else's DNA had been there, it would probably be sufficient to give me reasonable doubt.
 
Last edited:
angrysoba said:
This is just evading the question. Do you think Adnan did it or not?
Click to expand...

No it is not evading the question. It matters not what I, you or anyone thinks. It matters what can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. And now the prosecution has conceded that it wasn’t proven beyond reasonable doubt.

But true believers will continue believing.
 
lionking said:
No it is not evading the question. It matters not what I, you or anyone thinks. It matters what can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. And now the prosecution has conceded that it wasn’t proven beyond reasonable doubt.

But true believers will continue believing.
Click to expand...

Right. We know that. This is not news to anyone about what the official legal status is.

But, what is this “true believers will continue to believe”? That is a weird non-sequitur?

Earlier in this thread you were opining that you did not like the conviction. What would your response be if I said your opinion does not matter?

But now that the case has reversed and gone your way you believe that it is sufficient for you to declare that the law in all her solemn majesty hath spoken and all must be silent under before her judgment.

Besides, after I answered your question, I responded with questions of my own which you did not answer….

angrysoba said:
To answer your question, his conviction was voided, according to the latest legal motion, because of Brady violations (failure to disclose evidence that may have helped Adnan). From what I can gather that mostly consists of excluding other suspects too quickly or being too confident in cell phone data.

Okay then, but now please answer these questions….

1. How does the DNA “exclude” Adnan?
2. Who do you think is a more likely suspect and why? (Remember that the other facts of the case have to fit that story better than they do Adnan).
3. What does Mosby mean by “the care is over”? Does it mean they have officially decided that Nobody will be convicted of her murder and that nobody will continue looking for the murderer because nobody else did it?
Click to expand...
 
angrysoba said:
Right. We know that. This is not news to anyone about what the official legal status is.

But, what is this “true believers will continue to believe”? That is a weird non-sequitur?

Earlier in this thread you were opining that you did not like the conviction. What would your response be if I said your opinion does not matter?

But now that the case has reversed and gone your way you believe that it is sufficient for you to declare that the law in all her solemn majesty hath spoken and all must be silent under before her judgment.

Besides, after I answered your question, I responded with questions of my own which you did not answer….
Click to expand...

I really have no idea what you are on about. The case has been reviewed by far better authorities than you and I. Deal with it.
 
lionking said:
I really have no idea what you are on about. The case has been reviewed by far better authorities than you and I. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

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?

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.

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.

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?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom