Skeptics Guide to the Universe Forums

Media => Podcasts => Topic started by: Johnny Slick on December 04, 2014, 01:41:20 PM

Title: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on December 04, 2014, 01:41:20 PM
So what does everybody think? Personally, I think that Adnan never should have been convicted in the first place and that it's more likely than not - forget reasonable doubt - that he didn't do it (my money leans towards Jay). The latest episode, where, unbelievably, it turned out that Jay was given an attorney by the prosecutor, pushes it way past the "I have any doubts" line for me.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on December 04, 2014, 02:55:04 PM
So what does everybody think? Personally, I think that Adnan never should have been convicted in the first place and that it's more likely than not - forget reasonable doubt - that he didn't do it (my money leans towards Jay). The latest episode, where, unbelievably, it turned out that Jay was given an attorney by the prosecutor, pushes it way past the "I have any doubts" line for me.
I spouted off on this topic already pre-crash, but I'm still left with the feeling that the only person who had a reason would be Adnan. I am left feeling that Jay was way more involved than he let on. My feeling is that Jay strangled the girl for Adnan. So Adnan can say he didn't commit the murder and not be lying and Jay can weave whatever version keeps his ass out of trouble because while he was involved in murder, he didn't "want" the girl dead. Jay sounds like quite a few guys I have known, and while I don't believe any of them are killers, they all make impulsive, bad decisions and have a dark, potentially violent streak to them.

That said, I don't think Adnan should have probably been convicted based on what went to court. I think there's plenty of reasonable doubt despite my arm chair quarterbacking this.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: teethering on December 04, 2014, 03:25:38 PM
So evidence seems thin and yeah I don't see how in the world he could have been convicted, seems a clear miscarriage of justice.

I also think he's innocent.  Jay admits to being involved and admits to lying in his testimony.  He got the benefit of a plea deal by pointing the finger at Adnan.  I'm tempted to think Jay just did it and the only question that keeps open is the motive.  There's some weirdness around Adnan and Jay's girlfriend (I think her name is Stephanie?) and Jay, with Adnan's attention for her, Jay's devotion to her and also her refusal to talk about the case.  My pre-crash speculation was that Stephanie maybe was jealous of Hae Min and got Jay to kill her or maybe killed her herself and got Jay to cover it up.  That seems crazy, but it wouldn't be unique, there was a case like this before.

It's possible Mr. S did it, but then why would Jay lie?  Seems like this theory leaves a lot more open questions.

Whoever did it I'm fairly certain it wasn't Anand and it's pretty clear Jay was involved and would know the killer.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: Sawyer on December 04, 2014, 10:41:47 PM
Whoever did it I'm fairly certain it wasn't Anand and it's pretty clear Jay was involved and would know the killer.

Then we end up right back at the question that is implied in almost every interview with Adnan - why is he not absolutely furious with Jay?  I know one of the key pieces of advice given in last week's episode was that trying to explain someone's emotional reactions is a terrible way to solve a crime, but seriously, Adnan is inhumanly calm every time Sarah has brought up Jay's lying. 

Regardless I don't know how this came through as a guilty verdict.  Even if the case presented to the jury was much more biased than what we are hearing (which it certainly was), I can't fathom sentencing a kid to a life in prison with huge gaps in the evidence.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: Johnny Slick on December 04, 2014, 10:53:07 PM
I think Adnan has also been in prison for 15 years to marinate on these issues. Perhaps 5 years in he *was* furious. Now he just seems like he's willing to let bygones be bygones so long as it ends in his release. If there's one thing that I've taken away from this program, it's that you really can't gauge how a person "should" react to a situation, particularly after so much time has elapsed.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: Sawyer on December 05, 2014, 12:11:48 AM
http://www.thebolditalic.com/articles/6330-charts-for-people-obsessed-with-serial (http://www.thebolditalic.com/articles/6330-charts-for-people-obsessed-with-serial)

Don't know if this was already posted in the old thread.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 05, 2014, 07:56:12 AM
Then we end up right back at the question that is implied in almost every interview with Adnan - why is he not absolutely furious with Jay?  I know one of the key pieces of advice given in last week's episode was that trying to explain someone's emotional reactions is a terrible way to solve a crime, but seriously, Adnan is inhumanly calm every time Sarah has brought up Jay's lying. 

Regardless I don't know how this came through as a guilty verdict.  Even if the case presented to the jury was much more biased than what we are hearing (which it certainly was), I can't fathom sentencing a kid to a life in prison with huge gaps in the evidence.

Where's the quality of life in 15 years of constant anger?  Besides, people can get used to anything.

Edit: Also, if this show's even remotely accurate, great googly boogly this should've been not guilty.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on December 05, 2014, 12:56:15 PM
So evidence seems thin and yeah I don't see how in the world he could have been convicted, seems a clear miscarriage of justice.

I also think he's innocent.  Jay admits to being involved and admits to lying in his testimony.  He got the benefit of a plea deal by pointing the finger at Adnan.  I'm tempted to think Jay just did it and the only question that keeps open is the motive.  There's some weirdness around Adnan and Jay's girlfriend (I think her name is Stephanie?) and Jay, with Adnan's attention for her, Jay's devotion to her and also her refusal to talk about the case.  My pre-crash speculation was that Stephanie maybe was jealous of Hae Min and got Jay to kill her or maybe killed her herself and got Jay to cover it up.  That seems crazy, but it wouldn't be unique, there was a case like this before.

It's possible Mr. S did it, but then why would Jay lie?  Seems like this theory leaves a lot more open questions.

Whoever did it I'm fairly certain it wasn't Anand and it's pretty clear Jay was involved and would know the killer.
Maybe I'm missing something, but I just don't see anything presented in this that suggests Jay would do it without being convinced to. It seems doubtful he even would have been looked at as a suspect and then he would have to extract himself once they brought Adnan in for fear Adnan would implicate him in the murder and not as an accessory after the fact.
Didn't multiple people say they had been shown Hae's body by Adnan? Also there seems to be a crapload of coincidence in the loaning of cellphones and cars on the day of the murder to believe Adnan wasn't at least aware of what Jay was doing. I think it's fairly clear Jay was more involved than he let's on, it's fitting Adnan into this that is difficult. I'm going with Jay as trigger man and Adnan as accomplice and motivator.

I can definitely be convinced here, I think some of the details are getting fuzzy on me.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: Johnny Slick on December 05, 2014, 01:37:28 PM
Quote
Didn't multiple people say they had been shown Hae's body by Adnan?
No. There was a kid who said that Adnan had shown him the body but he recanted his story and it kind of sounds like he borrowed it from something Jay said. Otherwise, the only person who directly claimed to see Hae's body is Jay.

Quote
Also there seems to be a crapload of coincidence in the loaning of cellphones and cars on the day of the murder to believe Adnan wasn't at least aware of what Jay was doing.
There's really not. What there is is a lot of evidence - in fact, this is documented in the interview itself - that the investigators sat down with Jay and the cell records and allowed him to reconcile his story with the towers. The problem is, even with this, his account is still not consistent with them:

http://viewfromll2.com/2014/11/23/serial-a-comparison-of-adnans-cell-phone-records-and-the-witness-statements-provided-by-adnan-jay-jenn-and-cathy/ (http://viewfromll2.com/2014/11/23/serial-a-comparison-of-adnans-cell-phone-records-and-the-witness-statements-provided-by-adnan-jay-jenn-and-cathy/)

That site, by the way, also has a good breakdown of how Jay's testimony in general is horribly unreliable for 4 reasons:


As for motive, I think that motive is heavily overrated. I realize that the classic killer-catching formula is motive, means, and opportunity, but a. even that doesn't actually lead you to a causal relationship ("X killed Y"), it just presents an interesting correlation that needs to be discussed further. I can think of any number of reasons a guy like Jay might have killed Hae. Maybe Adnan hired him (which I find specious as well, but it's at least more likely than Adnan killing her with his own bare hands). Maybe he did it just for the experience, Clockwork Orange style (this is, remember, a guy who tried to stab a friend of his because the friend had never been stabbed before). Maybe he was suspicious of Adnan's close relationship with Stephanie, Jay's then-girlfriend, and on the spur of the moment did something to get back at him. Maybe he cajoled Hae into giving him a ride and then tried to make out with her, and then she fought back and he accidentally killed her. I'm not saying any one of these reasons *is* it, but all of them are possible and part of why I'm not willing to say "nah, there's no motive, end of story".

Or maybe a 3rd party did it and Jay, being slightly more savvy WRT the justice system than Adnan and a guy known for, um, telling stories, told the cops what they wanted to hear because he saw the writing on the wall.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: JohnM on December 07, 2014, 04:53:23 PM


Is the fact adnan wanted a plea in both trials fairy irrelevant? dont get me wrong I think he mostly innocent. So why would he?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 07, 2014, 05:02:25 PM
Innocence is not immunity.  :(
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: Johnny Slick on December 07, 2014, 06:20:35 PM
Is the fact adnan wanted a plea in both trials fairy irrelevant? dont get me wrong I think he mostly innocent. So why would he?
He touched on his current line of thinking in the latest episode, which is that regardless of whether you're actually innocent of the crime, if you're a minority living in Baltimore and the cops have decided you committed a crime, you're going to jail and the only question is whether or not you choose to accept a lesser deal.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: Movius on December 08, 2014, 08:43:14 AM
My prediction is that the series will end with the state's version totally debunked but when confronted with this Adnan confesses (to a different course of events.)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: Sawyer on December 08, 2014, 10:23:59 AM
My prediction is that the series will end with the state's version totally debunked but when confronted with this Adnan confesses (to a different course of events.)

I will bet 1000 SGUbucks against this happening. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on December 08, 2014, 10:32:43 AM
How many dogecoin is that?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on December 08, 2014, 02:07:39 PM
Quote
Also there seems to be a crapload of coincidence in the loaning of cellphones and cars on the day of the murder to believe Adnan wasn't at least aware of what Jay was doing.
There's really not. What there is is a lot of evidence - in fact, this is documented in the interview itself - that the investigators sat down with Jay and the cell records and allowed him to reconcile his story with the towers. The problem is, even with this, his account is still not consistent with them:
I guess I was really looking for something to suggest that Adnan had no part in this, other than his insistence he had no part in this. I think a few coincidences is enough to cast doubt, but there are a crapload of coincidences that suggest he was around and with Jay the day of the murder. While I am internally fairly convinced that Jay is the triggerman, I just don't see a path that says Adnan didn't ask Jay to do it and get involved in the coverup. Clearly the investigators did help to concoct the timeline, but that says more about Jay's story and nothing about Adnan's inability to explain the huge coincidences or provide an alibi.
If Jay did all of this, pinned it on Adnan months later, he was extremely lucky in that he is exploiting Adnan's timeline in ways he couldn't have known or foreseen that would have caused his entire version to collapse. All that it would have required would be for Adnan to be doing something visible at the time of the crime, which Jay couldn't have known about - unless he knew exactly where Adnan was, which is kind of my point: with him.

Another aspect that bothers me is that Adnan said he would kill Hae, and wrote it down in a notebook that he would kill Hae, and then shortly after Hae is murdered. How many of us write down we want to murder someone? Maybe I'm extrapolating too much from myself, but I don't think most of us, even if we felt hurt and betrayed, would walk around talking about how we wanted to kill someone. I can see Jay being the impulsive type. I have known people just like him and I could see them killing someone for all the wrong reasons on an impulse, particularly if asked to do it. I'm also not big into "The Stranger" method of proving guilt, but if Adnan was in contact with Hae before she disappeared, then failed to contact her even once when she vanished... uhhh, that seems a weird time to stop reaching out to someone. It just smells too fishy.

Again, though, I think in a courtroom Adnan should have gotten off, even if I'm suspicious he was involved.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: Desert Fox on December 10, 2014, 11:59:25 AM
Having looked a number of other cases, I don't think I agree that police are actual good skeptics. . . .Too many times do they latch onto the most outlandish theories. Even if maybe I am looking at the wrong cases, the crazy ones, I have also read books where the interview police officers. In the 1980s, a bunch argued for Satanic Ritual Abuse. As well, during this time Richmond VA had a ritual crime unit.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: JohnM on December 11, 2014, 08:49:03 AM
Episode 11


Well I thought this was the most irrelevant episode so far, we learnt nothing.
The whole episode was suggestion and innuendo about how he might be a psychopath then at the end it was rubbished.
So Adnan stole some money from the mosque. It has no relevance to the murder case.
When I was his age I stole stuff from shops and sold it the playground. If my parents or som1 asked me how I got the money I would just say I did some garden work.
If he had a history of violent outbursts that might be different but petty cash? hardly any different from downloading a torrent.

Only one episode left though I cant see how som1 wont continue with the case in some way? There will be so much demand.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on December 11, 2014, 09:00:10 AM
I agree the rumors ep didn't tell us much, other than "next ep is the last". Although, it was interesting that people typically commit murder not because they carefully plan it out but they do think about it. "I'd be better off if my wife was dead." And it turns over in their mind for a while and then one day there's a fight and that tips the balance.

I noticed this case has been getting some real world press.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on December 11, 2014, 10:27:51 AM
The innocence project lawyer, I have to agree that almost people who commit a crime are dumb ones. Crimes, including murders, are usually pretty simple. Certain cases you do get a feel that the defendants are innocent and innocent defendants have the hardest time defending themselves.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on December 11, 2014, 01:50:19 PM
The criminal psychologist was the heart of it, I thought. I don't think that any of *us* were persuaded here but that's probably because all of us are at least familiar with Jon Ronson and have at least an inkling that a. the term "psychopath" is thrown around way too often, and b. it's usually complete bullshit anyway. For me, the fact that Adnan has not engaged in psychopathic behavior in his 15 years in prison means that it is highly, highly unlikely that he is a psychopath now playing a "long con" to get out of prison eventually.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on December 11, 2014, 03:04:55 PM
The criminal psychologist was the heart of it, I thought. I don't think that any of *us* were persuaded here but that's probably because all of us are at least familiar with Jon Ronson and have at least an inkling that a. the term "psychopath" is thrown around way too often, and b. it's usually complete bullshit anyway. For me, the fact that Adnan has not engaged in psychopathic behavior in his 15 years in prison means that it is highly, highly unlikely that he is a psychopath now playing a "long con" to get out of prison eventually.

If you look at cases where an innocent person is arrested and convicted, they often have a harder time getting out of jail than somebody who is guilty. This is both because they will not show remorse in parole boards and they are less likely to accept whatever plea  that the prosecution offers.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: JohnM on December 11, 2014, 06:03:52 PM

Read a couple of reviews of the episode and they were in agreement this was a non-episode.



Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on December 12, 2014, 02:25:56 PM

Read a couple of reviews of the episode and they were in agreement this was a non-episode.
I agree with Slick. While the stealing was a diversion, and possibly interesting to some people, it was part of the criminal psychologist's case and the process Sara was using to try and determine who Adnan was for herself (and by extension for us).

My initial reaction was "I know he's not a psychopath" based on what has been said about him, but then I realized this is an area of interest to me and most of the skeptic community, so we're kind of ahead of the general public on the usage of that term.
I also think it was meant to highlight that even though Adnan doesn't seem like a killer, most people have it in them, even if for only a short period of time. I don't know where that will leave us in the last episode, I doubt there's a shocker or case breaker in it, but the psychologist was useful in setting our heads straight about Adnan's ability "to do the crime."
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: The Latinist on December 12, 2014, 03:12:01 PM
I don't think there's going to be a payoff for the annoying way the story's been dribbled at us.  I'm not likely to listen to a second season.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on December 14, 2014, 12:42:38 AM
I briefly went on /r/serialpodcast and they were all up in arms about the "Rumors" episode too.  I don't get the hate for it honestly.  So far, Koenig has pretty well laid out how conflicting all the available evidence and testimony is and has essentially said all along that she cannot come to a final conclusion on the matter because of it.  "Rumors" was her looking at the character of Adnan and also searching for any scrap of history that would jive with him being a stone-cold killer.  Seems like she pretty easily wrote off the rumors as either baseless or inconsequential.  Also, like Johnny said, ruling out the possibility that Adnan is a psychopath is equally important for the listener's perception of him.  Lastly, reading from the letter Adnan wrote her directly combated a lot of accusations about how he has behaved in the interviews in past episodes (i.e. "Why isn't he frothing at the mouth at every turn about being wronged?!").

No, it was not an episode with all sorts of juicy new facts and evidence, but it was extremely useful in taking a look at who Adnan was and is.  Since we are extremely unlikely to get a smoking gun, or rock-solid alibi next episode, and given the murky nature of what we do have it seems obvious to me that most people's opinions are going to rest largely on their perceptions of Adnan.

For my personal take, as I've not weighed in yet, at the very least I think he should not have been convicted based on the evidence and testimony provided.  There was an inordinate amount of reasonable doubt that should have gotten in the way of that.  That being said, he wasn't found not guilty and as I understand it, there is a higher bar to get the sentence overturned and I'm not sure he's able to meet that bar.  My sense is that Jay is clearly more culpable than he says and that Adnan is probably innocent, but there has to be some substantial piece of information that is being hidden to explain it; the case as we know it doesn't seem to provide a motive for anyone else to want to kill her.  Being that it's 15 years after when this information should have been sought out though, I think it's highly unlikely that it will reveal itself unfortunately.  For all we know, Hae's last boyfriend could have been the jealous type and was good friends with Jay so they set out to kill Hae and frame Adnan.  Fat chance of that ever coming out if it's the case though.

All-in-all, I'm under no illusions that this story is going to wrap up neatly with a bow.  I fully expect the last episode to be largely about how it's impossible to come to a firm conclusion with the available facts and what that means legally.  Koenig will probably address the unavoidable criticism that her first season didn't solve the mystery it set out to as well.  I suspect it will end with an aside on the innocence project people's efforts on Adnan's behalf.  It's possible Koenig's withholding some key piece for the last episode, but I doubt it.  I can't say I have a single complaint about this show though.  It's been fascinating from day one and I've loved every moment of it.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: JohnM on December 14, 2014, 07:26:31 AM

I think there is some truth in Sarah now downplaying the final couple of shows because she is a bit put off by the amount of people who have got involved and making their own investigations.  There was talk of more than 12 but that is now out of the question.

There is so much she could focus on probably enough for another 3-4 episodes jut whats on reddit and i've not read much over there.

I hope Sarah presents her own conclusions on the case.

The only remaining question is will anyone carry it on after Sarah?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on December 15, 2014, 10:38:29 AM
she is a bit put off by the amount of people who have got involved and making their own investigations.  There was talk of more than 12 but that is now out of the question.

Boy, I hope people don't start harassing people involved.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Movius on December 18, 2014, 07:28:56 AM
RIP in peace Mailkimp.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on December 18, 2014, 08:20:27 AM
Get off work at 5:50ish.  Check my podcast list for updates like usual.  HOLY SHIT IT'S SERIAL FINALE DAY!!  YES!  It's been uploaded!  Click to download for my perfectly timed 50 minute drive home.  Wait for it to finish.  Still Waiting.  Shit!  It's downloading SLOOOOW.  Guess I'm not the only one jumping on it early.  It's not even done by the time I get home...  Well, time for an extra long morning walk!

Gotta say, I really liked the ending.  Wrapped it up the only way it could be wrapped up IMO, and on top of that brought some new things to light we didn't know about and revisited so old things that needed it.  I really look forward to seeing where Adnan's case goes and what happens to him and I cannot wait for season 2!
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on December 18, 2014, 08:29:33 AM
Here's the final episode to if you're interested in watching it instead of just listening.

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/6ab2d45a77/the-last-episode-of-serial (http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/6ab2d45a77/the-last-episode-of-serial)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: JohnM on December 18, 2014, 09:58:29 AM
Get off work at 5:50ish.  Check my podcast list for updates like usual.  HOLY SHIT IT'S SERIAL FINALE DAY!!  YES!  It's been uploaded!  Click to download for my perfectly timed 50 minute drive home.  Wait for it to finish.  Still Waiting.  Shit!  It's downloading SLOOOOW.  Guess I'm not the only one jumping on it early.  It's not even done by the time I get home...  Well, time for an extra long morning walk!

Gotta say, I really liked the ending.  Wrapped it up the only way it could be wrapped up IMO, and on top of that brought some new things to light we didn't know about and revisited so old things that needed it.  I really look forward to seeing where Adnan's case goes and what happens to him and I cannot wait for season 2!

I wonder how we are going to be able to keep track of the case now? Will probably have to rely on bits an pieces from other journos. Will Sarah do one of podcasts if there is news from the innocence project?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on December 18, 2014, 10:07:16 AM
Get off work at 5:50ish.  Check my podcast list for updates like usual.  HOLY SHIT IT'S SERIAL FINALE DAY!!  YES!  It's been uploaded!  Click to download for my perfectly timed 50 minute drive home.  Wait for it to finish.  Still Waiting.  Shit!  It's downloading SLOOOOW.  Guess I'm not the only one jumping on it early.  It's not even done by the time I get home...  Well, time for an extra long morning walk!

Gotta say, I really liked the ending.  Wrapped it up the only way it could be wrapped up IMO, and on top of that brought some new things to light we didn't know about and revisited so old things that needed it.  I really look forward to seeing where Adnan's case goes and what happens to him and I cannot wait for season 2!

I wonder how we are going to be able to keep track of the case now? Will probably have to rely on bits an pieces from other journos. Will Sarah do one of podcasts if there is news from the innocence project?

I imagine the email list for the podcast will include some updates via other articles.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on December 18, 2014, 10:55:37 AM
Jay is involved for sure. The final episode just confirms that. How he can be linked with a serial killer, I don't know. My feeling is Adnan did it and got Jay to help bury the body. But as the reporter concludes, beyond Jay's testimony, there's zip physical evidence that Adnan did it.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on December 18, 2014, 11:43:18 AM
Jay is involved for sure. The final episode just confirms that. How he can be linked with a serial killer, I don't know. My feeling is Adnan did it and got Jay to help bury the body. But as the reporter concludes, beyond Jay's testimony, there's zip physical evidence that Adnan did it.

The thing that gets me is that everything we know about Adnan doesn't jive with what would be involved in committing this murder and pleading innocence to his own detriment for 15 years.  There has barely been a hint that Adnan could or more importantly would do such a thing and I have a very, very hard time believing he's the Dexter-like figure he'd have to be were he to be guilty and lying.  It just makes me reiterate again that there is clearly a large piece of the puzzle we are missing here which puts what we do know into focus.  It could be that Adnan had more motivations for killing her and keeping quiet than we are aware, it could be that Jay had motive to kill Hae and took the Adnan's loan of the car and phone as the perfect opportunity to frame Adnan, it could be that Jay somehow randomly got pulled into Ronald Moore's actions, or any other number of things both outlandish and reasonable.  I think what we have in the end here is first and foremost the inescapable conclusion that there wasn't enough evidence to rightfully convict Adnan in the first place and that there is probably cause for the state to revisit his case and conviction.  Beyond that I feel like we have the scales of justice leaning reasonably in multiple directions and that while we may argue and may even agree that one scale is heavier than the others, whatever that extra weight is, is so minute that it should be ignored.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on December 18, 2014, 02:57:23 PM
RIP in peace Mailkimp.
Okay, that actually made me lol  ;D

I really wanted to come around to thinking Adnan is innocent, I'm hoping this last episode will sway me. Maybe.
As of today I still can't see how Adnan is so neatly tied up in this otherwise. Granted Jay's story has shifted enough to drop less convenient facts in his telling, but it still relied on a massive amount of circumstantial luck to pin it on Adnan that he had no way of foreseeing or manipulating.

Here we go...
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on December 18, 2014, 04:14:55 PM
I usually download my new podcasts Monday so be a couple of days before I get to the last episode
I have a concern with the second to the last episode though.
She interviewed a criminal psychologist where he talks about a perpetrator having partial or full amnesia of a crime and then remembering it.  From what I have read, that is kind of bullshit. It very likely is a false memory you created through talking to other people.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: teethering on December 19, 2014, 03:42:29 PM
Serial killer angle is such a looooong shot.

My guess though is that Jenn and Jay are involved somehow.  Jay probably gave Adnan's cellphone to the person who ended up killing Hae.  Maybe it was a serial killer, maybe they know each other somehow and he had some kind of a hold over Jay, but that seems far from the prosaic explanation these sorts of things usually have.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on December 19, 2014, 04:05:31 PM
It's not uncommon for, say, a jealous GF to demand her BF kill his mistress. But I don't really understand why Jay would ultimately cop to helping, unless he was afraid they'd figure out he and his GF killed her and was willing to cop to a lesser charge and pin it on Adnan.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on December 19, 2014, 05:02:37 PM
Serial killer angle is such a looooong shot.

My guess though is that Jenn and Jay are involved somehow.  Jay probably gave Adnan's cellphone to the person who ended up killing Hae.  Maybe it was a serial killer, maybe they know each other somehow and he had some kind of a hold over Jay, but that seems far from the prosaic explanation these sorts of things usually have.

I think that given the oddities in this case, almost anything could be categorized as a long shot until we have evidence.  It does seem crazy that all this could be the result of some unknown and random third party, but then again so does Adnan being basically Dexter, or Jay wanting to kill Hae when he barely was even aware of her, and so on.  That's why this show was so engaging IMO; despite all the facts, nothing seems to quite fit them right without just seeming wrong somehow.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on December 19, 2014, 05:36:23 PM
It's not uncommon for, say, a jealous GF to demand her BF kill his mistress. But I don't really understand why Jay would ultimately cop to helping, unless he was afraid they'd figure out he and his GF killed her and was willing to cop to a lesser charge and pin it on Adnan.
I think it's clear to everyone that Jay was more involved than he claimed. It also seems credible Jay was scared of more than just the police. I am with the other person in the podcast who just can't buy into the fact that Adnan was extremely unlucky in that the day Hae went missing he asked her for a ride, lent his car and cellphone to the person who said he did it, and couldn't come up with an alibi or remember anything about that day. And to top it off, the person who pinned him for it seemed to know enough about the fact that no one would be able to pin him down anywhere to create a problem for his own story.

After this last episode I'm back to believing Jay did the murder under Adnan's guidance and help. Even though I would have had a ton of reasonable doubt on the jury, I just can't shake the doubt I have about Adnan's innocence, as much as I want to believe.

It was a fun ride. And that serial killer thing seems like bullshit based only the fact that Jay knew where the car was.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on December 19, 2014, 05:40:35 PM
Serial killer angle is such a looooong shot.

My guess though is that Jenn and Jay are involved somehow.  Jay probably gave Adnan's cellphone to the person who ended up killing Hae.  Maybe it was a serial killer, maybe they know each other somehow and he had some kind of a hold over Jay, but that seems far from the prosaic explanation these sorts of things usually have.
The biggest issue with the serial killer theory is that Jay knew where the car was. Otherwise, I could just about see him kowtowing to the cops, making up a story around the facts the cops gave him, and then the cops choosing to believe him because they had extreme tunnel vision.

That being said, Serial can't outright put up a case that it was Jay without opening themselves up to a slander suit (podcasts count as verbal communication, right?) and I feel like this instance as well as several others are SK trying to say "it would be great if there was a bit more light shed on Jay" as much as anything else. There's actually quite a bit about Jay that they actually *didn't* report because it would have begun to have given the series a different focus: I've seen it intimated that Jay has not exactly been a choir boy since this, for instance. Of course, from Adnan's perspective the last thing he wants to do from a jail cell is start throwing out accusations (what if he only thinks it was Jay but it actually turns out to *be* the serial killer, Jay found out about the car through other means, and now he's closed off a potential exonerating witness? What if he accuses Jay rather forcefully and that causes someone to make an exculpatory statement, and then in turn the state argues that said witness was being threatened?).

You hope the truth comes out eventually but unfortunately I just don't think truth works that way.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on December 19, 2014, 06:37:30 PM
If Jay was out to Murder Hae, it seems not unreasonable that having  Adnan lend him his car and phone would provide him with an opportunity to frame Adnan and would have been the impetus to act that day, and I think the first episode laid out a solid case for why it's not unreasonable that Adnan didn't remember what he did that day.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: JohnM on December 20, 2014, 05:42:17 AM

One place for future updates is Rabia's blog (who brought the case to Sarah)

http://www.splitthemoon.com/ (http://www.splitthemoon.com/)

I still have huge misgivings about the person (streaker) who found the body. There does not seem to much talk about it though so I must be missing something.

Going 100 + feet into the wood for piss? As a cyclist who's taken 100's of roadside toilet breaks I can honestly say I've never ventured more than 10 feet into a wooded area for relief.



Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on December 20, 2014, 11:03:43 AM
Well, they did look at that and the notion that he'd go a lot further just because it's a fairly open area did seem relatively plausible.

In other news, it appears that one of the cops on Adnan's case is being sued for planting evidence:

http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/03/05/55427.htm (http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/03/05/55427.htm)

This has been alleged elsewhere (the subreddit primarily) but this does to me open up a whole new angle on the case. Perhaps the cops showed Jay where the car was rather than the other way around. Given their behavior elsewhere in the case regarding his string of confessions (specifically, the way they sat with him unrecorded for several hours before they began to record said confessions), I already though it likely-to-plausible that they simply handed Jay the list of cell phone calls and allowed him to cook up a story as to what was going on during said calls. This, frankly, isn't even something that would cause a guy who has a record of planting drugs in a witness' car to "encourage" them to testify off-guard: in this scenario I could definitely see where the cop might think "we've got the guy, now let's make everything else we have add up so we can bring a good case to the prosecution".

The thing of it is, I like SK still have doubts as to whether or not Adnan did it. I don't think that the prosecution even came close to making their case, and it it weren't for the railroady bullshit I think it's entirely plausible that the detectives would have worked harder and found other evidence which really did lead a path to Adnan's or somebody else's door. In a really large sense, I feel like this is the real tragedy here: even if the cops happened to luck into catching the right guy, justice was never served in this case.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Sawyer on December 21, 2014, 12:12:32 AM
SNL Parody.  Even managed to get the the shrill-voiced DA into the sketch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATXbJjuZqbc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATXbJjuZqbc)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on December 21, 2014, 02:02:14 PM
Alright, so I binged the whole show over the weekend, start to finish.

So as not to bury the lede, if I was a juror I think I would have concluded there was reasonable doubt, but it's not a slam dunk for the defence.

More importantly for today, there are 2 serious issues with the defence; the "tactical" decision not to use the potential alibi, and the incompetent assistance of counsel claim.  I think it needs a retrial.

The "tactical" issue is a difficult one.  On one hand, the appellate courts cannot condone trial lawyers proceeding with one line of defence and not another so as not to potentially muddle the jury (or to have the jury conclude that throwing everything at the wall is an indication of guilt) and then argue at appeal that the jury didn't hear all the evidence.  On the other hand, the courts can't send people to jail when there is potentially exculpatory evidence which was not presented to the trier of fact.  Finding the balance between those two is an extraordinarily difficult tightrope act.

Coincidentally, the Supreme Court of Canada just confirmed an appeal from the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal (https://www.canlii.org/en/ns/nsca/doc/2014/2014nsca63/2014nsca63.html) on the tactical issue.  While the SCC did not release reasons other than agreeing with the majority at the NSCA, Justices Beveridge and Farrar stated:

Quote
This case engages the sometimes difficult question about the extent to which a judge should be swayed by the claimed ability of the defence to make what he or she believes to be sound tactical decisions to try to secure the most favourable verdict.

Typically, the issue arises in circumstances where it appears that the defence goal to grasp the golden ring in a criminal trial—an outright acquittal—may be compromised by reference to alternative partial defences.  It is hypothesized that the jury may be sceptical about the validity or credibility of a defence that advances alibi, but also suggests if that fails to raise a reasonable doubt, how about provocation or intoxication?

The facts here were a little different, and importantly so - in MacLeod all the relevant evidence was before the jury, it's simply that they were not instructed on the availability of manslaughter.  In Syed's case, the defence decided not to put relevant facts before the jury.  That is, to be frank, negligent, especially if her client wanted the evidence raised.  Sure, sometimes counsel and clients disagree, but in the end you are working for them.  If you can't in good conscience follow their instructions, remove yourself from the case, but don't substitute your opinion for theirs.

That procedural issue aside, to the merits of the case.  I think there was reasonable doubt, but this is the problem with a jury trial; who knows what they will do?  Judges are "experts" (insofar as they do it on a daily basis) at assessing the credibility of a witness, but a jury is not.  For whatever reason, they felt Jay was believable.  Lets be frank, he was convicted of a criminal offence and testified as to his involvement in said offence.  Sure, all that about the prosecutor getting him an attorney was messed up, but he admitted to involvement in a homicide.  Nothing, and I mean nothing, is more persuasive to a jury than a confession.  We call it a "statement against penal interest"; why would a rational person say something which would so obviously lead to a negative outcome for themselves unless it was the truth?

Now, of course in this case there was a reason why - Jay might be the murderer.  Pinning it on Syed and explaining any physical evidence found on his alleged assistance could in fact be a way of minimizing the penal consequence to himself.  But it doesn't appear that the defence was able to sell that.  Maybe the facts just weren't there.  Maybe the jury got hung up on some particular detail which sold it for them.  I think it was enough for reasonable doubt, but I wasn't there to assess Jay's credibility.  Perhaps he really was believable.

To the podcast itself, I disliked all the focus on motive.  Perhaps that's necessary to sell the story; we obviously seek motivation in other people for the things they do, especially where they are nigh unexplainable.  But that's not required in a prosecution.  Obviously it makes it easier to sell to a jury, but it's not necessary.  Just proving intent (and really it's mens rea, not intent) is necessary.  I also disliked the focus on the whodunit aspects - I thought this was a story about Syed.  Obviously proving someone else did it is a way of showing Syed didn't, but this should be about whether Syed did it.  That's all.

I dislike all the "what ifs" I see on the Internet, and even in this thread.  I think there wasn't enough for a conviction here, but I'm far from convinced of his innocence.  Maybe there was some malfeasance on the part of the cops, but I have no knowledge of that, and I don't need that; Syed deserves the benefit of the presumption of innocence.  Unlike Johnny, I do think the prosecution came close, but that hangs significantly on the believability of Jay.  I don't think he was sufficiently credible (based on what is admittedly a limited picture presented in a podcast), and therefore I think Syed deserves an acquittal.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on December 22, 2014, 09:45:57 PM
I think I have a very simple answer. . . .
Maybe while cruising, Jay found Hai's car.
Neither Jay or Anon had anything to do with her murder.
When the police picked up Jay, they stated that Anon is guilty and unless they help convict him, he will walk free.
Maybe he even thought that Anon was guilty.
All of the memories of everybody else were created after the fact.

Thoughts? I have seen similar elements in various other cases
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on December 22, 2014, 10:41:29 PM
It seems really, really coincidental that a guy who knows an ex-girlfriend who was murdered also just happens to be the guy who finds said car. Otherwise, it wouldn't surprise me if the police presented him with the dilemma you're describing. Whether Jay was complicit or not, it's possible that he found himself in a situation where cooperating with the cops was the only way he was going to keep his nose clean of this. I'd go so far as to say that, one way or the other, that's the most likely explanation. As noted, in fact, I'm not even completely convinced that Jay was the person who found the car.

As part of her effort to raise money for Adnan's legal defense, Rabia Chaudry has released a couple of documents (http://www.splitthemoon.com/?p=486#more-486) from the case. It's mostly a lot of pretty unimportant trivia from the time period, some of which was touched upon in the early part of the program (for instance, the evidence detail of Hae's car includes that notebook where an entire page is just her new boyfriend's name written over and over again - WHY IS IT THAT THIS IS A-OK FOR A 17 YEAR OLD GIRL BUT IF I DO THAT WITH FELICIA DAY THE POLICE COME AND TALK TO ME??). I guess the most important bit, at least according to Rabia, is that the police interviewed a witness (2 months later, so on the one hand, memories change but on the other, it's a weird time to be investigating the crime, as the interview apparently occurs after Adnan was incarcerated) who stated she saw Adnan in his track suit after 3pm the day Hae went missing.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on December 23, 2014, 02:06:55 AM
Actually, I meant to edit but never got to it. . . . It could have been either Jay or Anon who found Hae's car.
I also would not call it so much a coincidence but that they might have had at least a weather eye out for the car.
If the damage from the minor accident she had was not fully repaired, might have been something that caught their interest.

What was the name of the serial killer that was suggested?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on December 23, 2014, 05:52:25 AM
What was the name of the serial killer that was suggested?

Ronald Moore.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on December 23, 2014, 09:51:07 AM
I did like the ex bf's point that when Hae went missing, he was smart enough to know the cops are first going to suspect the ex bf. And he started figure out where he was that day and what he could prove. Yet, oddly, Adnan didn't think to do that.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on December 23, 2014, 09:54:05 AM
I did like the ex bf's point that when Hae went missing, he was smart enough to know the cops are first going to suspect the ex bf. And he started figure out where he was that day and what he could prove. Yet, oddly, Adnan didn't think to do that.

Was seventeen years old?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on December 23, 2014, 01:17:21 PM
I did like the ex bf's point that when Hae went missing, he was smart enough to know the cops are first going to suspect the ex bf. And he started figure out where he was that day and what he could prove. Yet, oddly, Adnan didn't think to do that.

Was seventeen years old?

He was also smart. I agree, however, it's awfully weak sauce to hang a person. But as one of the researchers indicated, he's guilty or you believe this long string of improbable things that had to happen for him to be innocent. A butt dial. Being this super sociable guy but being no where anyone could place him during the alleged time of the murder. And so on.

That said, I'm not sure the latter point is not a logical fallacy. It's like saying "the odds of you being born, your parents meeting, their parents meeting, their parents meeting, all the things that could have kept anyone in that chain from having sex the day the next generation was conceived... it's so improbable you were born. Therefore, you can't possibly exist."
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on December 23, 2014, 01:24:09 PM
I did like the ex bf's point that when Hae went missing, he was smart enough to know the cops are first going to suspect the ex bf. And he started figure out where he was that day and what he could prove. Yet, oddly, Adnan didn't think to do that.

Was seventeen years old?

He was also smart. I agree, however, it's awfully weak sauce to hang a person. But as one of the researchers indicated, he's guilty or you believe this long string of improbable things that had to happen for him to be innocent. A butt dial. Being this super sociable guy but being no where anyone could place him during the alleged time of the murder. And so on.

That said, I'm not sure the latter point is not a logical fallacy. It's like saying "the odds of you being born, your parents meeting, their parents meeting, their parents meeting, all the things that could have kept anyone in that chain from having sex the day the next generation was conceived... it's so improbable you were born. Therefore, you can't possibly exist."
This line of reasoning is what keeps me from unequivocally saying Adnan is innocent.
However, I do understand outliers, so while it seems implausible, it remains possible, and he may just be that unlucky outlier.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on December 23, 2014, 02:07:57 PM
I did like the ex bf's point that when Hae went missing, he was smart enough to know the cops are first going to suspect the ex bf. And he started figure out where he was that day and what he could prove. Yet, oddly, Adnan didn't think to do that.

Was seventeen years old?

He was also smart. I agree, however, it's awfully weak sauce to hang a person. But as one of the researchers indicated, he's guilty or you believe this long string of improbable things that had to happen for him to be innocent. A butt dial. Being this super sociable guy but being no where anyone could place him during the alleged time of the murder. And so on.

That said, I'm not sure the latter point is not a logical fallacy. It's like saying "the odds of you being born, your parents meeting, their parents meeting, their parents meeting, all the things that could have kept anyone in that chain from having sex the day the next generation was conceived... it's so improbable you were born. Therefore, you can't possibly exist."
This line of reasoning is what keeps me from unequivocally saying Adnan is innocent.
However, I do understand outliers, so while it seems implausible, it remains possible, and he may just be that unlucky outlier.

I think this string of improbabilities is being over hyped.  If neither Jay or Adrian has anything to do with the murder, I think most just go away. The only thing strange is what happened with Jay and finding the car. Maybe he did not actually find it or maybe he and/or Jay found it but were afraid to report it initially.   
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on December 23, 2014, 02:09:55 PM
I did like the ex bf's point that when Hae went missing, he was smart enough to know the cops are first going to suspect the ex bf. And he started figure out where he was that day and what he could prove. Yet, oddly, Adnan didn't think to do that.

Was seventeen years old?

He was also smart. I agree, however, it's awfully weak sauce to hang a person. But as one of the researchers indicated, he's guilty or you believe this long string of improbable things that had to happen for him to be innocent. A butt dial. Being this super sociable guy but being no where anyone could place him during the alleged time of the murder. And so on.

That said, I'm not sure the latter point is not a logical fallacy. It's like saying "the odds of you being born, your parents meeting, their parents meeting, their parents meeting, all the things that could have kept anyone in that chain from having sex the day the next generation was conceived... it's so improbable you were born. Therefore, you can't possibly exist."
This line of reasoning is what keeps me from unequivocally saying Adnan is innocent.
However, I do understand outliers, so while it seems implausible, it remains possible, and he may just be that unlucky outlier.

I think this string of improbabilities is being over hyped.  If neither Jay or Adrian has anything to do with the murder, I think most just go away. The only thing strange is what happened with Jay and finding the car. Maybe he did not actually find it or maybe he and/or Jay found it but were afraid to report it initially.
If he found the car, I think anyone trying to suggest Jay had zero involvement in this murder case is in severe risk of breaking something bending over backwards.

If it turns out the serial killer committed the crime I will videotape myself eating a hat.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on December 23, 2014, 02:37:14 PM
Jay's involvement in the murder is pinned on him simply knowing the location of her car. He could not have possibly known about her car's location if the real killer had not led him to it.

But the assumption is Jay knew about the car's location and the police did not know. Lots of people are convicted of murder because they "knew" details about the crime that only the murderer could know. But when you review the cop interview it goes something like this:

"Okay, let's just say you did kill her. How would you have done it?"

"Like I say, I didn't kill her. But I guess smash her on the head with a rock."

"No. No. You were in a car. There's no rock."

"Oh, strangle her?"

"No. You were both seat belted in."

"Oh, shoot her through the temple?"

Three hours go by.

"See, here's the problem Jimmy the Loser. No one knew she was murdered by gun shot in a car. Yet, here you seem to know she was shot through the temple in a car. Let me read what you said.... Look. You're going to fry if you don't admit guilt and show a jury you're trying to work with us..."

What if the cops knew where her car was? And questioned Jay in such a way that it seems like Jay knew the car location?

Although, there's also the problem of Jay's coworker he wonder why Jay was telling him about burying the body and was scared out of his mind.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on December 23, 2014, 03:02:14 PM
Jay's involvement in the murder is pinned on him simply knowing the location of her car. He could not have possibly known about her car's location if the real killer had not led him to it.

But the assumption is Jay knew about the car's location and the police did not know. Lots of people are convicted of murder because they "knew" details about the crime that only the murderer could know. But when you review the cop interview it goes something like this:

"Okay, let's just say you did kill her. How would you have done it?"

"Like I say, I didn't kill her. But I guess smash her on the head with a rock."

"No. No. You were in a car. There's no rock."

"Oh, strangle her?"

"No. You were both seat belted in."

"Oh, shoot her through the temple?"

Three hours go by.

"See, here's the problem Jimmy the Loser. No one knew she was murdered by gun shot in a car. Yet, here you seem to know she was shot through the temple in a car. Let me read what you said.... Look. You're going to fry if you don't admit guilt and show a jury you're trying to work with us..."

What if the cops knew where her car was? And questioned Jay in such a way that it seems like Jay knew the car location?

This is all possible but as an alternative I believe the car was found in a general area he hung out near. As such, I think it is at least possible that he had seen it before.

Although, there's also the problem of Jay's coworker he wonder why Jay was telling him about burying the body and was scared out of his mind.

Memories created after the fact. . . .Read some of Elizabeth Loftus work on just how easily false memories can be created. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: SPOILERS ABIDE)
Post by: AQB24712 on December 25, 2014, 11:31:07 PM
I'm also not big into "The Stranger" method of proving guilt, but if Adnan was in contact with Hae before she disappeared, then failed to contact her even once when she vanished... uhhh, that seems a weird time to stop reaching out to someone. It just smells too fishy.
Hae's current boyfriend, Don the optician, also did not attempt to contact her after she vanished and the police called him.

Again, though, I think in a courtroom Adnan should have gotten off, even if I'm suspicious he was involved.
Preach.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: AQB24712 on December 29, 2014, 07:49:36 PM
Interview with Jay, (https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/12/29/exclusive-interview-jay-wilds-star-witness-adnan-syed-serial-case-pt-1/) part one of two.

had to fix, sry -wastrel
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on December 29, 2014, 07:55:04 PM
Interview with Jay,]https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/12/29/exclusive-interview-jay-wilds-star-witness-adnan-syed-serial-case-pt-1/]Jay, (https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/12/29/exclusive-interview-jay-wilds-star-witness-adnan-syed-serial-case-pt-1/) part one of two.
argh broken!!!
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: wastrel on December 29, 2014, 09:02:08 PM
Is it just me, or did that not help clear up anything at all.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: AQB24712 on December 29, 2014, 09:55:01 PM
Not just you, and thanks.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on December 30, 2014, 01:31:33 PM
I liked how he has come up with yet ANOTHER story about how he managed to come across the car. That's great.

I haven't read through this yet, but my lawdog friend (NOT IRREVEREND HE IS AN ENEMY) insists that this is a pretty devastating takedown of the denial of Adnan's appeal in 2003:

http://viewfromll2.com/2014/12/29/serial-the-maryland-court-of-special-appeals-unpublished-decision-denying-adnans-appeal-in-2003/#more-4663 (http://viewfromll2.com/2014/12/29/serial-the-maryland-court-of-special-appeals-unpublished-decision-denying-adnans-appeal-in-2003/#more-4663)

Unfortunately, there's not a lot out there to appeal an appeal just for being wrong.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on December 30, 2014, 02:29:49 PM
I don't have the ability to comment on the U.S. law, but I don't see any reason why that last letter from Hae to Adnan shouldn't be admissible.  Yes, it's hearsay but the writer is deceased, thus meeting the necessity criterion, and any issues of reliability would go to weight.  I think it's also not very good for Adnan, and any defence lawyer would fight for it to be excluded.  It's no smoking gun, but it is nice corroboration of the State's theory of the case.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Tatyana on December 30, 2014, 04:07:47 PM
Jay finally gives an interview:

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/12/29/exclusive-interview-jay-wilds-star-witness-adnan-syed-serial-case-pt-1/


i've been ninja'd while I read the other link. :)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Tatyana on December 30, 2014, 04:14:03 PM
This is something that bugs me, if they really were not friends, why did Adnan lend Jay his car and phone?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on December 31, 2014, 12:14:37 PM
1. Adnan should not have been convicted based on available evidence.

2. I think Adnan probably did it, but Jay was way more involved than he admits. How it went down is a total mystery, but I'm confident that both Jay and Adnan were involved based on the pile of circumstantial evidence.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: JohnM on January 01, 2015, 10:29:00 AM

Why would Jay do this interview considering (according to Rabia) that he could face prosecution for lying? Would any amount of money would rectify this.

Does anything Jay say help with his release or is this only going to happen if som1 else is proven guilty.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on January 08, 2015, 10:29:52 PM
Here's a post-Serial interview with one of the prosecutors. (https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/01/07/prosecutor-serial-case-goes-record/)  He also claims that no one at Serial tried to get a hold of him for an interview until the week before the last episode went out.  An interesting read, but I'm not really swayed by anything he said and the journalist is biased as all hell judging by the lead-in to the interview.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: teethering on January 09, 2015, 04:13:33 PM
And Serial responds:

http://www.vulture.com/2015/01/serial-hits-back-on-prosecutors-allegations.html?wpsrc=nymag (http://www.vulture.com/2015/01/serial-hits-back-on-prosecutors-allegations.html?wpsrc=nymag)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on January 09, 2015, 04:25:45 PM
Well, I for one am SHOCKED that this guy lied through his teeth.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on January 10, 2015, 02:18:35 PM
I'm sad that the podcast's popularity has not stirred up anything revelatory.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on January 10, 2015, 08:49:44 PM
It's difficult to accept something as professional as the TAL organization would not make multiple, documented attempts to contact someone as important as the prosecutor.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on January 10, 2015, 10:47:52 PM
It's difficult to accept something as professional as the TAL organization would not make multiple, documented attempts to contact someone as important as the prosecutor.

Given their response, it sounds like they did.  Whether the other party believes them or acknowledges their records is another matter.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on January 26, 2015, 03:43:57 AM
This works so well:

Honora: Serial - The Rom Com (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLG1TuKMqEM#ws)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on January 26, 2015, 08:18:35 PM
This works so well:

(click to show/hide)

LOST
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 28, 2015, 12:59:52 AM
What Happened, v1: What Probably Really Happened

Adnan went over to Jay's house. They got high. Jay asked to borrow Adnan's car. Adnan went back to school Jay drove across town and picked up Jay's Sketchy Friend. Jay's Sketchy Friend noticed the cell phone. They made some calls. Jay and Jay's Sketchy Friend did some halfhearted birthday present shopping for Stephanie. Jay's Sketchy Friend dropped Jay off and kept the car. Hae saw Adnan's car while out of her normal routine, possibly to leave a note on Don's car. She approached the car and thus met Jay's Sketchy Friend. Jay's Sketchy Friend killed her. For some reason. JSF calls Jay and does the trunk-pop routine. They drive up to the State Park and smoke a joint. JSF tells Jay to meet him later and help him bury the body.

Jay picks up Adnan and they hang out in the neighborhood where Jay is supposed to meet JSF, so Adnan can go home and leave Jay without being suspicious. They hang out with Jay's friend's friend, who thinks they are sketchy. Adnan goes home and Jay buries the body with JSF. Jay abandons Hae's car. JSF says that he will kill Stephanie or Jay if Jay says anything.

The police track Jenn through Adnan's cell phone. JSF gets antsy and Jay is scared for Stephanie, so makes a Hail Mary and confesses to the cops. The end.

What Happened v2: The Law & Order version

Adnan and Stephanie were having an affair. Hae sees Adnan's car and approaches, only to find Jay and Stephanie making out. Hae, who never liked Stephanie due to Adnan's affections, confronts her. Stephanie confesses to the affair. They fight and Stephanie kills Hae. Jay, utterly devoted to Stephanie, agrees to help. When the police trace Adnan's phone to Jenn, Stephanie orders Jay to blame Adnan for everything, possibly while cackling maniacally. Jay blames Adnan for the affair so he agrees. Decades later he still blames Adnan for ruining his chances with Stephanie, so he maintains his story out of bitterness to the very end.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on January 28, 2015, 04:56:36 PM
DI's expert opinion:

Adnan decided to kill Hae for some unknown reason. Adnan devises a half-baked plan with Jay that he believes will give him an alibi. Adnan asks Hae for a ride, which sets the plan in motion. At some point totally unrelated to the story told to authorities by Jay, Hae is strangled by one or the other of them (I lean toward the latter, considering that Hae was athletic), and they bury her together. Jay freaks out when the cops start sniffing, and throws Adnan under the bus to save his own skin. Adnan is faced with admitting he had some sort of role in Hae's death, or maintaining innocence; he chooses the latter, believing that there wasn't enough evidence to convict. His assumption wasn't unfounded, but he's convicted anyway.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 28, 2015, 05:03:03 PM
I don't think Adnan knows anything about Hae's death. His behavior has been totally consistent with that. The idea that he killed her requires that he be alternately a sociopathic criminal genius and a complete moron and a dupe, as required by the story. It's just too inconsistent. It also doesn't explain Jay's wildly shifting narrative, nor Adnan's complete uselessness to his own defense.

I just don't believe he knows anything about it.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on January 28, 2015, 05:26:11 PM
I don't think Adnan knows anything about Hae's death. His behavior has been totally consistent with that. The idea that he killed her requires that he be alternately a sociopathic criminal genius and a complete moron and a dupe, as required by the story. It's just too inconsistent. It also doesn't explain Jay's wildly shifting narrative, nor Adnan's complete uselessness to his own defense.

I just don't believe he knows anything about it.

Adnan being a good liar isn't so unbelievable to me.

I don't believe the story Jay told, but I do think that both he and Adnan were involved in Hae's death.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 28, 2015, 05:33:42 PM
Adnan being a good liar doesn't sound unbelievable to me either. In fact with his obvious charisma I'd say it's a safe bet. What does sound unbelievable is any scenario where he killed her. I didn't say anything about his ability to lie.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on January 28, 2015, 09:21:36 PM
Either way Jay was involved.   It certainly could be that Jay did it and just pointed to Adnan to get a reduced sentence
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on January 29, 2015, 12:26:24 AM
DI's expert opinion:

Adnan decided to kill Hae for some unknown reason. Adnan devises a half-baked plan with Jay that he believes will give him an alibi. Adnan asks Hae for a ride, which sets the plan in motion. At some point totally unrelated to the story told to authorities by Jay, Hae is strangled by one or the other of them (I lean toward the latter, considering that Hae was athletic), and they bury her together. Jay freaks out when the cops start sniffing, and throws Adnan under the bus to save his own skin. Adnan is faced with admitting he had some sort of role in Hae's death, or maintaining innocence; he chooses the latter, believing that there wasn't enough evidence to convict. His assumption wasn't unfounded, but he's convicted anyway.
I pretty much came to this conclusion early on, really wanted to find Adnan innocent, just like Sarah did, but by the end just couldn't make any sense of a scenario where anyone else who knows Hae is motivated enough to actually kill her.

At the end of all this all I do know is: poor Hae.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: The Latinist on January 29, 2015, 12:47:58 AM
I think it is likely that the two of them conspired to murder Hae, planned Adnan's alibi, and disposed of the body together.  Whether Jay or Adnan did the actual strangling is in some ways immaterial, but I suspect that Adnan would have an easier time getting close enough to her.

But I think it remains just possible that Jay killed Hae alone, perhaps out of jealousy over a perceived relationship between Adnan and Stephanie.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: JohnM on January 29, 2015, 06:37:16 AM

One side of the story I've not heard much form is the jury members. In the US are they allowed to give in opinion such as they would act differently with this evidence?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 29, 2015, 07:19:12 AM
OK, somebody walk me through the reasoning for suspecting Adnan. Because as I can tell there is nothing to implicate him whatsoever, and a lot to suggest he had nothing to do with it.

If he and Jay had "planned his alibi together," you would think he would actually have an alibi! The whole reason he is in pison is that he doesn't have an alibi.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: The Latinist on January 29, 2015, 10:23:58 AM
If he and Jay had "planned his alibi together," you would think he would actually have an alibi! The whole reason he is in pison is that he doesn't have an alibi.

Can I take it, then, that you think Jay acted alone and simply framed Adnan?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 29, 2015, 11:08:47 AM
No. I posted my theory above. I think it was somebody else entirely. Somebody Jay was scared of. I think it's a safe bet that Jay had sketchier friends than himself. I think his story to the police wasn't fabricated, just massaged to make the details work with Adnan instead of the guy that actually did the deed. I think they probably went out tot he state park and contemplated hiding Hae and her vehicle there, then decided against it. I think Jay's story about Adnan threatening Stephanie were really about this other guy.

I think there is no version of the timeline wherein Adnan leaves school at 2:45 (Adnan left school at 2:15 but Hae was last seen around 2:45), kills Hae, calls Jay, ditches the car, and then makes it back to track practice at 3:30. I think if Adnan was lying about what he did that day, he would have changed his story by now because there is no reason for him to stick with a lie that is actively hurting both his criminal defense and his chance for parole.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: The Latinist on January 29, 2015, 12:07:37 PM
I don't see any reason to believe that there was a third party involved.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on January 29, 2015, 12:24:45 PM
I don't see any reason to believe that there was a third party involved.

Do you think that there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to convict Adnan though?

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 29, 2015, 12:41:19 PM
I don't see any reason to believe that there was a third party involved.

I don't think you can explain Jay and Adnan's behavior any other way. I don't see Jay acting alone, and I don't see Adnan involved at all.

SOMEBODY called Jenn's looking for Jay, then called Adnan's cell phone, right around the time that Hae was killed. When Jenn next sees Jay, he's already saying that he helped bury a body. Jenn says he is scared and freaked out about it. Is he already laying the groundwork for a plan to implicate Adnan? I don't think so. I think he just helped bury a body, and he's being honest with Jenn.

He later tells at least one other person that he helped bury a body, and another that he knew about a murder before the police had approached him. Why is he spreading it around that he was involved at all, if he did the actual deed? Granted this could be letting the pressure of such a giant secret out in short bursts so that he can keep the meat of it deep inside without exploding, but I think by this point it's safe to say Jay knows how to keep a secret.

Jay's coworker at the video store says that he was scared of somebody because he knew about a murder. If you trust that guy – and to be honest, I don't really since his statements reek of post hoc embellishment – then it seems more likely that Jay was afraid of his Sketchy Friend and his Sketchy Friend's friends than that he was afraid of the Muslim religious community of Baltimore.

Anyway, I don't see any reason to discount a third party, given that there is not nearly enough evidence to implicate either Jay or Adnan. (At least in the actual murder. I think it's pretty clear Jay was involved somehow.) If Jay didn't do it, and Adnan didn't do it, then somebody else did it. To me it seems likely that Jay did not do it, and even more likely that Adnan did not do it.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: The Latinist on January 29, 2015, 01:55:27 PM
I don't see any reason to believe that there was a third party involved.

Do you think that there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to convict Adnan though?

No, I've said several times that I think there was reasonable doubt. It think it is most plausible that they planned it together and each took part to some degree, but I am not sure enough of that that I would have voted to convict.   As I said last night, I think it remains just possible that Jay killed Hae alone and blamed Adnan for it.  I don't see any reason to believe that a mysterious third party somehow had a motive to murder Hae and used Jay to frame Adnan for the murder, however.

lofgren, I don't see how anything in the behavior or either Jay or Adnan that can't be explained by a simple conspiracy between Jay and Adnan. Clearly Jay's not told the whole truth and has lied about several important factors, but all that gets you is that Jay was more involved than he was willing to admit. Not buying the grand conspiracy frame-up theory.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on January 29, 2015, 02:12:43 PM
I don't see any reason to believe that there was a third party involved.

Do you think that there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to convict Adnan though?

No, I've said several times that I think there was reasonable doubt. It think it is most plausible that they planned it together and each took part to some degree, but I am not sure enough of that that I would have voted to convict.   As I said last night, I think it remains just possible that Jay killed Hae alone and blamed Adnan for it. I don't see any reason to believe that a mysterious third party somehow had a motive to murder Hae and used Jay to frame Adnan for the murder, however.

lofgren, I don't see how anything in the behavior or either Jay or Adnan that can't be explained by a simple conspiracy between Jay and Adnan. Clearly Jay's not told the whole truth and has lied about several important factors, but all that gets you is that Jay was more involved than he was willing to admit. Not buying the grand conspiracy frame-up theory.
Yeah, I have a serious problem with the third party thing too. It violates Occam's Razor all to hell. I understand that doesn't mean it isn't possible though. I also abide by the idea that Adnan blithely walked right into the unluckiest situation ever is hard to accept. Again, his bad luck may be an outlier.

All said, I think there is so much reasonable doubt that he shouldn't have been convicted. I still think he was involved though.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 29, 2015, 02:46:06 PM
lofgren, I don't see how anything in the behavior or either Jay or Adnan that can't be explained by a simple conspiracy between Jay and Adnan. Clearly Jay's not told the whole truth and has lied about several important factors, but all that gets you is that Jay was more involved than he was willing to admit. Not buying the grand conspiracy frame-up theory.

OK, let's say Adnan is involved. That means he:

1. Hid his brimming rage over Hae from all of his closest friends.
2. Coldly fabricated a plot with a guy he only sort of knew.
3. Hung around school until 2:45 or so.
4. Got a ride from Hae, murdered her, called Jay, ditched the body, and returned to school in 45 minutes.
5. Called the girl he was currently pursuing, while he had the body of his ex-girlfriend chilling in the trunk less than five feet away, during the time he was supposedly at school, then put on Jay to chat with her, even though his alibi required he and Jay to be apart at that time.
6. Got picked up by Jay, went and hung out with strangers for a while.
7. Buried the body in the park and then went about his evening.
8. Masked his guilt, behaving totally consistently while threatening the life of Jay's girlfriend.
9. Did not offer an alibi nor aid in his own defense nor change his story over decades even though it was a lie and sticking to that lie got him sent to prison.
10. Offered nothing to counter Jay's version of events or Jay's credibility, despite his story being a lie.[/li][/list]

That's one cold, ruthless, evil, really dumb motherfucker. Adnan doesn't seem like any of those things.

Also:

1. Asia was mistaken about seeing Adnan in the library that day.
2. Adnan's absence from track practice went unnoted.
3. Adnan's absence from mosque went unnoted.
4. Jay and Adnan were counting on Adnan's absences going unnoted for their alibi.

On the contrary, if Adnan was not involved:

1. Asia was correct in her recollection of seeing Adnan at the library.
2. Adnan's presence at mosque and practice went unnoticed because it was a typical occurrence.
3. Neesha is mistaken about the date of the phone call when she talked to Jay. (As indicated by her testimony.)

The evidence that Jay didn't act alone is more slim, but I think:

1. Jay would not have been mouthing off about knowing about a murder if he had done it. Jay clearly knows how to keep his mouth shut. I find it far more likely that he would go around telling people he knew about a murder because it would make him sound cool and bad ass than that he would go around telling people he knew about a murder if he actually did it.

2. Jay inserts himself into the investigation even though the police are not looking at him yet. This could be clever maneuvering, but I think it was because the police had already talked to Jenn. She lied to them, because all she knew was that Jay had told her he helped bury a body. She covered for him that much. Jay decided that the only way to keep Stephanie safe was to head the police off before they abandoned Adnan as a suspect.

If he had actually committed the murder, I think it would be safer for him to just keep his head down at this point. The police had no reason to suspect or even look at him. The only reason the police talked to Jenn was to attempt to verify Adnan's whereabouts through his cell phone. If Jay had just told them that he had Adnan's cell phone, the police would have simply looked for another method to check Adnan's non-alibi.

3. Jay's story is obviously poppycock, but it contains some interesting details that may very well be based on real life.

4. If Jay worked alone, then it's hard to explain how he moved two cars during the time he had both Adnan's and Hae's cars. As I do not think that Adnan was involved, it seems like Jay must have had another driver with him.

5. During the likely time of murder, Jay was with Jenn, where he received a call on her landline and then on Adnan's cell phone.

Jay has never explained why he drove Adnan's car out to the neighborhood near Leakin Park that morning after dropping Adnan back at school. He knew several people who lived in that area, people who might know that it is a good place to hide a body.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 29, 2015, 02:56:41 PM
Yeah, I have a serious problem with the third party thing too. It violates Occam's Razor all to hell. I understand that doesn't mean it isn't possible though.

Occam's Razor does not work that way. Just because Jay said that Adnan did it does not mean that the most likely scenario is that Adnan did it. This is Baltimore in the '90s. It's not as though there is a shortage of murderers. We do not convict people just because it is the simplest possible scenario.

Quote
I also abide by the idea that Adnan blithely walked right into the unluckiest situation ever is hard to accept.

If this logical fallacy doesn't have a name, it should.

Adnan's situation is not supremely unlucky if you assume that loaning Jay his car was the incident that led to Hae's murder, as it does in my scenario above. Honestly in the episode where the producer runs through Adnan's supposedly incredibly bad luck, I kept thinking, "Wait, how is that bad luck?"

Whoever killed Hae had the opportunity to do so because Jay had Adnan's car.

Adnan's cell phone gets called right around the time of the murder because Jay gets called right around the time of the murder and Jay has Adnan's cell phone.

Adnan is in the neighborhood where Hae is buried that night because that's where Jay wants to be, so that he can bury the body.

None of that is bad luck. It all happens because Adnan lent Jay his car. These are not unrelated, isolated incidents. One flows from the other, each one increasing the likelihood of the next, with Jay orchestrating several of them and also providing the narrative. Not because he's a criminal genius, mind, just because each step seems to make sense at the time.

Combine one overworked lawyer, a little racism, and some cops and prosecutors who really want this case off their desks. None of those things are bad luck. That's just every single day for every single person in the justice system.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on January 29, 2015, 03:04:34 PM
Yeah, I have a serious problem with the third party thing too. It violates Occam's Razor all to hell. I understand that doesn't mean it isn't possible though. I also abide by the idea that Adnan blithely walked right into the unluckiest situation ever is hard to accept. Again, his bad luck may be an outlier.

All said, I think there is so much reasonable doubt that he shouldn't have been convicted. I still think he was involved though.

Isn't that like the reverse lottery fallacy?  Clearly it is highly unlikely that anyone wins the lottery therefore you can't claim your prize despite having the winning ticket?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on January 29, 2015, 03:29:01 PM
Yeah, I have a serious problem with the third party thing too. It violates Occam's Razor all to hell. I understand that doesn't mean it isn't possible though.

Occam's Razor does not work that way. Just because Jay said that Adnan did it does not mean that the most likely scenario is that Adnan did it. This is Baltimore in the '90s. It's not as though there is a shortage of murderers. We do not convict people just because it is the simplest possible scenario.

It isn't about the simplest scenario possible, it's about not multiplying your assumptions needlessly. I think introducing a third party no one has even mentioned before is the definition of multiplying your assumptions. You have created a character to suit a specific narrative. That is the definition of violating Occam's Razor. It clearly doesn't matter if I caveat the shit out of my posts either, so it hardly seems necessary for me to say, I get that Occam's Razor isn't a rule or a law, but it's a good guide to avoid absurd and unwarranted theoreticals.

Yeah, I have a serious problem with the third party thing too. It violates Occam's Razor all to hell. I understand that doesn't mean it isn't possible though. I also abide by the idea that Adnan blithely walked right into the unluckiest situation ever is hard to accept. Again, his bad luck may be an outlier.

All said, I think there is so much reasonable doubt that he shouldn't have been convicted. I still think he was involved though.

Isn't that like the reverse lottery fallacy?  Clearly it is highly unlikely that anyone wins the lottery therefore you can't claim your prize despite having the winning ticket?
AGAIN, the caveat has been ignored.
Read drwfishesman's thread about his friend doing rash and stupid things that are completely out of character. I don't think we can say Adnan was incapable of murdering someone just because it's out of character, anymore than we can say he isn't capable. So all things being equal we have to assume a larger number of inconveniences for him, and a large number of conveniences for a motivated third party to suddenly capitalize on with no prior planning and then have it all work out. To say he had no involvement at all introduces an entirely new narrative for which we're missing shit tons of pieces of, and really don't even have a reason to believe exists, unless we start with the assumption Adnan is innocent.

AGAIN, this isn't impossible, but I would rather trade in plausibilities than possibilities.

And AGAIN, none of this rises to the level of abolishing legal reasonable doubt.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 29, 2015, 03:46:09 PM
Yeah, I have a serious problem with the third party thing too. It violates Occam's Razor all to hell. I understand that doesn't mean it isn't possible though.

Occam's Razor does not work that way. Just because Jay said that Adnan did it does not mean that the most likely scenario is that Adnan did it. This is Baltimore in the '90s. It's not as though there is a shortage of murderers. We do not convict people just because it is the simplest possible scenario.

It isn't about the simplest scenario possible, it's about not multiplying your assumptions needlessly. I think introducing a third party no one has even mentioned before is the definition of multiplying your assumptions. You have created a character to suit a specific narrative. That is the definition of violating Occam's Razor. It clearly doesn't matter if I caveat the shit out of my posts either, so it hardly seems necessary for me to say, I get that Occam's Razor isn't a rule or a law, but it's a good guide to avoid absurd and unwarranted theoreticals.

Occam's Razor is about to discerning between two equally plausible explanations given the evidence. It only comes into play if you think it is equally plausible that Jay or Adnan killed Hae as if a stranger did it.

Making Jay or Adnan or both the killer contradicts known evidence, the expectations of everybody who knew them, and the testimonies of all involved -- not just Jay and Adnan but Jenn and Asia as well. Making a stranger the killer means that one of the other possibly thousands of people who had means, motive, and opportunity did it and only Jay is lying.

The only reason you think Occam's Razor applies is because you have just been told a story about Jay and Adnan so you think one of them must have done it. This is not a fiction. The most likely scenario is that the person who actually did it, did it. Adnan only looks like a possibility because Jay said he did it, and Jay only looks like a possibility because he knew where the car was. If Jay just happened to walk by and notice the car, and decided to tell the police that Adnan did it because he just didn't lke Adnan, then that doesn't violate Occam's Razor. That's just "what happened."
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: The Latinist on January 29, 2015, 04:15:48 PM
I do not think that your assertion that there is evidence that either Jay or Adnan could not have committed this murder is justified. There is evidence that it could not have happened exactly how or when Jay and the State said it did, but that is not the same thing.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 29, 2015, 04:33:23 PM
With regards to Jay, I agree. My points against the scenario in which he acted alone were all based on subjective judgements (of a person I have never met no less) and logistics rather than actual evidence. It would be difficult for him to kill Hae and move her car in the two hours between when he left Jenn and when he picked up Adnan, but not impossible.

With regards to Adnan, I disagree. There is no evidence that even remotely suggests he was involved other than Jay's testimony, which we all agree is crap. I am still waiting for somebody to offer any scenario where Adnan was the killer that makes one lick of sense.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: The Latinist on January 29, 2015, 05:11:27 PM
There is no evidence that even remotely suggests he was involved other than Jay's testimony, which we all agree is crap. I am still waiting for somebody to offer any scenario where Adnan was the killer that makes one lick of sense.

That is not the same as evidence that Adnan couldn't have done it.  You said that evidence contradicted either of them being the killer, but it just doesn't.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 29, 2015, 05:47:58 PM
You can't just keep asserting that. Lay out a timeline. Tell me whose testimony you trust and why. You're starting with a presumption of guilt and then tossing out evidence that is inconvenient.

Based on the current evidence there is no way that Adnan did it. So who are you saying is lying or mistaken and why? Is Asa mistaken about seeing him in the library? Is his teammate wrong about seeing him at practice? Is Hae's friend lying about seeing her near 3 pm at the wrestling office?

If you're going to claim that he's involved, you must at least be able to put forward a plausible scenario where that explains how, and you ought to have at least some justification for which witnesses you believe and why.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 29, 2015, 05:51:25 PM
Also I don't think I ever said he couldn't have done it, just that everything is consistent with him not having done it.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on January 29, 2015, 05:54:55 PM
With regards to Jay, I agree. My points against the scenario in which he acted alone were all based on subjective judgements (of a person I have never met no less) and logistics rather than actual evidence. It would be difficult for him to kill Hae and move her car in the two hours between when he left Jenn and when he picked up Adnan, but not impossible.

With regards to Adnan, I disagree. There is no evidence that even remotely suggests he was involved other than Jay's testimony, which we all agree is crap. I am still waiting for somebody to offer any scenario where Adnan was the killer that makes one lick of sense.
So because Jay is an unreliable narrator you're willing to toss out Adnan's involvement because Jay said so, but no other aspect of Jay's testimony? You seem to be kind of randomly deciding on what you agree with in Jay's testimony and what you disagree with.
Even if Jay is substantially lying, and the truth lies somewhere inbetween, that doesn't mean Adnan wasn't involved. You seem to have come to the conclusion that that is exactly what it means? I'm asking because I am sick to death of drawing conclusions on this forum and then having some flimsy logical fallacy thrown in my face. And you still don't seem to understand the law of parsimony.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on January 29, 2015, 05:55:45 PM
You can't just keep asserting that. Lay out a timeline. Tell me whose testimony you trust and why. You're starting with a presumption of guilt and then tossing out evidence that is inconvenient.

Based on the current evidence there is no way that Adnan did it. So who are you saying is lying or mistaken and why? Is Asa mistaken about seeing him in the library? Is his teammate wrong about seeing him at practice? Is Hae's friend lying about seeing her near 3 pm at the wrestling office?

If you're going to claim that he's involved, you must at least be able to put forward a plausible scenario where that explains how, and you ought to have at least some justification for which witnesses you believe and why.
Yeah, I'm not even sure there's a point debating this with you. Your mind seems to be made up.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on January 29, 2015, 06:05:45 PM
I would ask this: What did Jay say that was verified true that HE COULDNT HAVE KNOWN, unless he was involved or was told about the murder by someone. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: The Latinist on January 29, 2015, 06:14:50 PM
No, lofgren, you are the one making a claim that there is evidence that Adnan didn't do it.  What fact or combination of facts do you feel excluded Adnan as a suspect? This is not an unfair shifting of the burden, since you are the one making the claim.  If you merely wish to say that there is no evidence that Adnan did it, I'll gladly take the burden off you.  But you've made a claim that evidence exists but haven't offered any evidence.  That's not fair.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on January 29, 2015, 07:57:09 PM
I would ask this: What did Jay say that was verified true that HE COULDNT HAVE KNOWN, unless he was involved or was told about the murder by someone.
For example, the cops, who got tunnel visioned onto Adnan and wanted to put together a case.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on January 29, 2015, 09:40:31 PM
I would ask this: What did Jay say that was verified true that HE COULDNT HAVE KNOWN, unless he was involved or was told about the murder by someone.
For example, the cops, who got tunnel visioned onto Adnan and wanted to put together a case.
This for me at least makes ALL of Jay's testimony extremely suspect.  I'd LOVE to have a recording of what he said the very first time he talked to them.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on January 29, 2015, 09:41:27 PM
I agree.  I wonder what was said in the three hour prep before recording the first interview
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on January 29, 2015, 10:46:51 PM
The only thing that makes me doubt (not in the legal sense.  I don't think there was enough reason to convict) Adnan did it is his behavior during the trial, during his time in prison, and on this podcast.  I just have a hard time working out a scenario which reconciles him killing Hae with his behavior as I think his activities prior to all this would seem to eliminate him as some sort of sociopath or psychopath.  I just don't get why he would kill Hae, plead innocent consistently, not offer any kind of alternative timeline to the prosecution's, stay in jail without admitting guilt to get out, be a model prisoner with zero negative marks on his record, and then agree to an extremely in depth series of interviews wherein he barely even tries to put anything forward which exonerates him.

That's it for me.  Beyond that, I think there are so many variables to this case that it's a lost cause trying to sift through them all, especially when it's a certainty that there are some very significant facts that we just plain don't know and will likely never know.  I just don't think it's really feasible to assign any kind of literal probability to any of the theories going around as even the less likely versions (i.e. some completely unknown third party and so on) stand a decent chance of being true.

I'm kinda content not knowing right now and am basically just waiting to hear about any potential updates from the people actually investigating and not just offering conjecture.  Right now, I'm imagining completely forgetting about this and then 30 years later someone publishes a tell-all which makes sense of all the loose threads, but even that's a pipe dream.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 29, 2015, 11:23:50 PM
So because Jay is an unreliable narrator you're willing to toss out Adnan's involvement because Jay said so, but no other aspect of Jay's testimony?

No, of course I throw out other aspects of Jay's testimony. It is literally impossible to make sense of this case without throwing out at least some parts of Jay's testimony, because Jay's testimony contradicts itself repeatedly.

Quote
You seem to be kind of randomly deciding on what you agree with in Jay's testimony and what you disagree with.

It's not random, it's a judgement, one I admit is subjective. However, I think I have good reasons for throwing out what I throw out and keeping what I keep.

Like the detective they spoke to on the podcast said, lies generally serve one of two purposes: they either reduce the liar's responsibility, or they protect somebody else. Assuming that Adnan killed Hae and that the rough outline of Jay's testimony is accurate, several obvious lies of Jay's make no sense. This was a point made on the podcast by an actual detective, not my personal opinion.

However, several of those lies DO start to make sense if you assume that Jay is protecting somebody else.

The most obvious example is the trip to the cliffs, where Jay and Adnan smoke a blunt and discuss what it felt like to kill Hae before Jay drives Adnan back to track practice. This obviously did not happen the way that Jay tells it, and he drops the story from his narrative in subsequent interviews. If he's making it up, why? Why would he insert this random story about driving way outside of the area of the crime to chill with Adnan? It makes no sense. It doesn't minimize Jay's involvement. It doesn't protect anybody. It's just this random story.

But imagine this: The trip to the cliffs actually happened, but with the real killer instead of Adnan. When Jay talks to the cops the first time, he gives a largely accurate account of his activities that afternoon, including the trip to the cliffs. At this point he doesn't know how well the cops can track the phone, he doesn't know where Adnan's car might have been seen, or where he might have been recorded. Part way through the story about the cliffs, he realizes that he has to get Adnan to track practice, because Adnan was seen there. Later, especially after seeing the call log which indicates that Adnan checked his messages at 5:15 when he was reunited with his phone, Jay knows that the trip to the cliffs makes no sense, so he simply drops it from his narrative.

It's my belief that Jay's first interview was the most accurate description of the actual events of the day, but that makes it impossible for Adnan to participate. Adnan's participation is only just barely possible in Jay's final testimony, but even then it's highly unlikely, and outright impossible if you believe Asia's testimony.

Quote
Even if Jay is substantially lying, and the truth lies somewhere inbetween, that doesn't mean Adnan wasn't involved. You seem to have come to the conclusion that that is exactly what it means?

No, for fuck's sake. Please read my posts. I have outlined my reasoning for thinking that Adnan did not do it.

Quote
And you still don't seem to understand the law of parsimony.

I understand that just because Jay says that Adnan was the killer does not make that the most likely scenario. You want to think that because it's only scenario you have been told, but Jay has a vested interest in lying. Indeed, we know he is lying. You cannot treat Adnan's involvement as the likeliest or simplest explanation just because it is the only explanation that has been offered by somebody who is motivated to lie and proven to do so.

That's like saying that my parents told me there is a Santa Claus, so the most parsimonious explanation for presents under my tree is that a fat man flies around the planet in a single night and climbs down impossibly tight chimneys to deliver them. And we don't even have a chimney!

Yeah, I'm not even sure there's a point debating this with you. Your mind seems to be made up.

It would be nice to see somebody actually try before you give up.

Look, I'm not asking for much. Look at the timelines. Consider the evidence. Offer me one single plausible scenario where Adnan was involved. Nobody has even tried. People just keep saying "Well, he was either involved or he wasn't." Wow, thanks for that tidbit Schrodinger. By all means, if he was involved, lay out a timeline. Show me means, motive, and opportunity. Show me any kind of plausible explanation. Because right now there is no opportunity – Jay's final testimony requires that the sun stood still for an hour – and there is no motive that anyone can attest to besides Jay.

No, lofgren, you are the one making a claim that there is evidence that Adnan didn't do it.

What the fuck kind of logic is this? Adnan as the killer is the fucking default position? That's just insane.

Quote
What fact or combination of facts do you feel excluded Adnan as a suspect? This is not an unfair shifting of the burden, since you are the one making the claim.  If you merely wish to say that there is no evidence that Adnan did it, I'll gladly take the burden off you.  But you've made a claim that evidence exists but haven't offered any evidence.  That's not fair.

At this point it seems like you didn't even listen to the podcast. Remember Asia's affidavit? The thing that set off the whole story?

There is literally more evidence that Adnan didn't do it than there is evidence that I didn't do it.

If you are going to exclude Asia's affidavit, ignore Jay's timeline, ignore Adnan's story, ignore basically everything that everybody has said (again, including Jay, since his own testimony makes it literally impossible for Adnan to have been the killer given the other facts in the case), then all I am asking is to know what you think happened. If you think Adnan did it and all of these people are mistaken and/or liars, why do you think that? What is your theory of the crime?

I can't believe that getting people to speculate on this is like pulling teeth. You must have formulated theories while you listened to the podcast.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 29, 2015, 11:52:13 PM
Here are my statements regarding Adnan's guilt:

OK, somebody walk me through the reasoning for suspecting Adnan. Because as [far as] I can tell there is nothing to implicate him whatsoever, and a lot to suggest he had nothing to do with it.

I don't think you can explain Jay and Adnan's behavior any other way. I don't see Jay acting alone, and I don't see Adnan involved at all.

I don't think Adnan knows anything about Hae's death. His behavior has been totally consistent with that.

Making Jay or Adnan or both the killer contradicts known evidence, the expectations of everybody who knew them, and the testimonies of all involved -- not just Jay and Adnan but Jenn and Asia as well.

This is based on the current theories of the crime. Nobody has come up with a theory of the crime that allows Adnan to be the killer. I have repeatedly asked that somebody do so. All timelines proffered by Jay and the state make it impossible for Adnan to have committed the crime.

There is no evidence that even remotely suggests he was involved other than Jay's testimony, which we all agree is crap.

Based on the current evidence there is no way that Adnan did it.

Again, this is based on the existing evidence. Jay's testimony, Asia's testimony, Jenn's testimony, the anonymous teammate, the cell phone log. Obviously you have to cast doubt on some of these things in order to make your case that Adnan was involved, just as I have with Jay. But given the testimonies at face value, there is simply no way that Adnan could have committed the crime.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 30, 2015, 12:37:02 AM
I would ask this: What did Jay say that was verified true that HE COULDNT HAVE KNOWN, unless he was involved or was told about the murder by someone.

As far as I know, nothing. It is possible that he was just walking by and happened to notice Hae's car where the real killer stashed it, and it is possible that he just coincidentally told Jenn that he had just helped bury a body on the night that Hae's body was buried.

Edit: Sorry, that doesn't really count as a verified fact I guess. So there's nothing except knowing where the car is.

I mean, those are two crazy coincidences, but it's not impossible.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on January 30, 2015, 12:42:02 AM
I don't see any reason to believe that there was a third party involved.

Do you think that there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to convict Adnan though?

No, I've said several times that I think there was reasonable doubt. It think it is most plausible that they planned it together and each took part to some degree, but I am not sure enough of that that I would have voted to convict.   As I said last night, I think it remains just possible that Jay killed Hae alone and blamed Adnan for it.  I don't see any reason to believe that a mysterious third party somehow had a motive to murder Hae and used Jay to frame Adnan for the murder, however.

Having been watching a number of 48 hours episodes recently, I am always asking "How the hell did you convict on the evidence presented." There are so many horrid cases where juries convict.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 30, 2015, 01:43:28 AM
And one last thing I will say on the subject:

Just because we haven't been told about a third party does not mean that there is not a third party. It doesn't even make a third party unlikely.

It's important to realize just how much of the story we know comes from Jay. Jay's story does not support the assertion that Adnan was involved. The only reason people think it does is because Jay said that Adnan was involved, but the details of the story make it clear that either Adnan wasn't involved or Jay isn't telling us the real story. Either way, Jay asserting that Adnan was involved does not make Adnan's involvement more likely, any more than my parents asserting that Santa Claus brought me presents makes that more likely.

People want to think that the crime must have been committed by Adnan or Jay because they are the main characters in the narrative, and it is satisfying to think that they must therefore be the key actors in Hae's death. Against all available evidence, we want to think that we know the players involved.

People say things like, "I can't think of who else would have a motive" or "I can't believe that some mysterious third party would have a motive." But

1. Young, pretty girls get killed on a shockingly consistent basis for no more motive than "I thought she was pretty." She could have been killed over $20 in her wallet for all we know.

2. The podcast did a piss poor job of investigating Hae. This was obviously a conscious decision, to keep the focus entirely on Adnan and the question of his guilt. But the result is that the podcast offers us no other plausible suspects except Jay. This is a matter of editing, not of fact.

For all we know there were twenty people who hated Hae's guts standing just off stage behind the curtains. The podcast never discussed that. We don't know anything about Hae's family life except that she was constantly talking about running away to live with her father in California – or at least did so often enough that many of her school friends assumed that was what she finally did when she went missing. We know she went to church, but we didn't hear anything about her church or her beliefs or the people she knew from church. We don't hear anything about her life outside of school. Even the bits we do hear from her school friends are obviously thoroughly edited both by the podcast and by decades of habitual veneration of the dead. Of course her friends loved her. They were her friends, and she's been dead for fifteen years.

I don't think a single person here believes that Adnan should remain in prison. What I want to know is why so many people think that he is still the most probable killer. I have been accused of throwing out parts of Jay's story that are inconvenient to my pet theory. As I have said multiple times, such judgments are subjective but I'm willing to defend every point. But I find it odd that people are willing to throw out everything about Jay's story except that Adnan was the killer.

My edits amount to little more than a name swap in Jay's first version of events. My version allows all of the other players to tell the truth. My version accounts for Jay's otherwise inexplicable lies and Adnan's behavior since his conviction.

Involving Adnan requires throwing out Jay's testimony entirely and calling into question Asia's and Jenn's. It requires turning Adnan into a virtuoso performer who is at turns almost impossibly wily and manipulative and yet also useless and inept. It does not explain Jay's lies, nor Adnan's behavior without invoking further hypotheticals.

So which is more parsimonious? Adding a single additional character who makes the whole story make sense, or twisting the whole plot into pretzels in order to implicate a guy just because he's the most famous actor in this episode?

Several of you have said that Adnan is the most plausible killer, and that he and Jay most likely conspired. All I have done is share my own theory and ask why you think that. Nobody has given an answer other than "parsimony." Which is the same as saying, "Well, that's how Jay wrote the story."

Hae's life had a cast of thousands, and you are standing between two of them saying, "We need to talk about these two characters. Acknowledging the others violates Occam's Razor." But they are just the two standing closest to you. They're not the two most likely to have killed her.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: The Latinist on January 30, 2015, 08:53:38 PM
No, lofgren, you are the one making a claim that there is evidence that Adnan didn't do it.

What the fuck kind of logic is this? Adnan as the killer is the fucking default position? That's just insane.

That is not what I said. I am not asking you to prove that Adnan didn't do it.  I am asking you to offer evidence to support a specific positive claim that you yourself made.  You said:

Based on the current evidence there is no way that Adnan did it. [emphasis added]

"[T]here is no way that Adnan did it" is not just a claim that there is inadequate evidence to convict Adnan of Hae's murder (an opinion with which I heartily agree) but a statement that there exists evidence that Adnan could not have murdered Hae.  You made that claim, therefore of course it is your duty to provide the evidence you claim exists.  That isn't making Adnan's guilt the default position, it's demanding that you actually back up your claims with evidence.

Quote
At this point it seems like you didn't even listen to the podcast. Remember Asia's affidavit? The thing that set off the whole story?

So you believe that Adnan could not have committed the crime because Asia places him at the library when the State claims she was killed.  Fine, that's at least an answer. That would indeed be dispositive if one trusted Asia's memory (I do not, but you may), provided that we had definitive evidence of the place and time of Hae's death.  But we do not have anything approaching evidence to establish where and when Hae died; indeed, the show exposed numerous inconsistencies in both Jay's account (or, rather, multiple conflicting accounts) and the State's timeline which I believe make it relatively unlikely that she died in that Best Buy parking lot when Jay said she did.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on January 31, 2015, 04:52:10 AM
Found an interesting podcast discussing this case (http://www.blogtalkradio.com/dan-zupansky1/2015/01/29/serial-susan-simpson) which made a lot of sense to me.  The format's a bit dull and the sound quality is muffled, but the interview is awesome.  The two money quotes from the guest:

Quote from: Attorney Susan Simpson
That leaves us basically where we started.  Jay could be lying and Adnan could still be guilty, or Jay could be lying because Adnan's innocent and Jay's trying really hard to hide who's really responsible.  In the end, Jay's stories don't get us anywhere; they're too incoherent, they're too contradictory, they are too provably false to provide any basis for explaining how Hae died.  And since the investigation stopped as soon as Adnan was identified as the prime target, there is no other research or contemporaneous information concerning who else might have killed her or how else she might have died.  So we are left with just this black hole in terms of actual evidence here of what might have happened because the State's whole case was based on investigating a lie.

Quote from: Attorney Susan Simpson
If i had a guess, i think a drug connection is going on.  That's what a lot of the evidence seems to lead back to, but that's definitely not the only answer and it could turn out to be a lot of different things that happened.


Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on January 31, 2015, 05:20:21 AM
Also, there were two huge things she mentioned that I don't recall hearing before as well.

1.  The cell tower location evidence was presented in a really wonky way to the defense.  They presented the results of the expert's investigation for all the towers, but only gave the actual data for two towers that were inconsequential and uncontested.  They erased the data for the others and/or never turned it over.  Her suspicion is that maybe the key tower, the one by Leakin Park, may have actually been reached from some of the locations that were further away than their presentation of the evidence suggested, meaning that even the cell records were useless as evidence.

2.  Jay's first interview had basically no events matching the phone records.  The second one had the detectives show him the records and locations and had him explain the calls.  At one point, he lied about being at some place completely inconsequential to the case, but was mistakenly (at that point in time) believed to be where one of the cell phone calls was made from.  Later they realized that the data showed something else.

Basically, these present 2 huge red flags that suggest the detectives and prosecution either knew Jay was lying and fed him info to support their case or incompetently did the same thing.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on January 31, 2015, 08:21:34 AM
No, all that was in the podcast.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Sawyer on January 31, 2015, 09:49:21 AM
Kind of off topic, but I've now discovered that I cannot listen to old episodes of This American Life featuring Sarah Koenig without mentally inserting Serial background music.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on January 31, 2015, 11:31:41 AM
No, all that was in the podcast.

Serial mentioned things related to those two points but I don't believe she mentioned the significance of how the cell tower evidence was presented or of that one specific fact that really showed Jay's testimony was being tailored by the defense and detectoves.  Serial surmised what these facts show, but it was less solid than it is after knowing these two facts.   I'm going to relisten to Serial I think so I'll double check myself.  Regardless the interview is really worth the listen IMO.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on January 31, 2015, 01:52:50 PM
So you believe that Adnan could not have committed the crime because Asia places him at the library when the State claims she was killed.  Fine, that's at least an answer. That would indeed be dispositive if one trusted Asia's memory (I do not, but you may), provided that we had definitive evidence of the place and time of Hae's death.  But we do not have anything approaching evidence to establish where and when Hae died; indeed, the show exposed numerous inconsistencies in both Jay's account (or, rather, multiple conflicting accounts) and the State's timeline which I believe make it relatively unlikely that she died in that Best Buy parking lot when Jay said she did.

No, you're oversimplifying. Asia's testimony accounts for the only hole in Adnan's whereabouts. That's why the state assumes that Hae was killed between 2:15 and 3:15, because that is the only time for which Adnan cannot account for his whereabouts that day.

Again, and as I have said, it's fair to not trust Asia if you think she was mistaken about the date that her conversation with Adnan took place. But her testimony is part of the evidence at hand. If you think that Adnan killed Hae, then Hae MUST have been killed between 2:45 and 3:15-3:30.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on January 31, 2015, 07:48:28 PM
lofgren, isn't a huge part of this problem that Adnan doesn't even know where he was for the vast majority of that afternoon/evening? You're throwing out parts of Jay's story that don't agree with your desired narrative, yet insisting that THIS part of Jay's narrative is correct because it gives Adnan an alibi. Asia might be correct, and she might be incorrect; at this point, it doesn't sway the case one way or the other since we know Jay's story is full of fabrications. We don't know when Hae was murdered.

For Adnan to have not been involved, he's got to loan his car and his phone AND go and hang out multiple times with the murderer on the day of the murder. Seems unlikely to me.

If you look at this objectively, and remove the "he seems like such a nice boy" angle, I think Adnan's involvement seems extremely likely.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on January 31, 2015, 08:30:10 PM
Is anybody at all familiar here with the Ryan Ferguson case?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_W._Ferguson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_W._Ferguson)

Might be able to educate a bit on how these can go wrong
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on February 01, 2015, 02:05:04 PM
lofgren, isn't a huge part of this problem that Adnan doesn't even know where he was for the vast majority of that afternoon/evening? You're throwing out parts of Jay's story that don't agree with your desired narrative, yet insisting that THIS part of Jay's narrative is correct because it gives Adnan an alibi.

Not exactly true. I'm throwing out Jay's timeline, but since he and Adnan both claim that Adnan went to track practice and Jay picked him up afterward, I'm guessing that, at the very least, Jay did pick Adnan up from track practice. There is no reason for him to claim that Adnan went to track practice if he didn't actually go. We also have the anonymous teammate who claims to remember seeing Adnan at practice and getting picked up by Jay afterward, although obviously that claim is highly suspect.

Here are the reasons I think Adnan was at track practice:

Quote
Asia might be correct, and she might be incorrect; at this point, it doesn't sway the case one way or the other since we know Jay's story is full of fabrications. We don't know when Hae was murdered.


First of all, Jay never said that the murder occurred around 3. He never timestamped the murder at all. The police provided that detail because that was when Adnan was unaccounted for.

Here are the reasons I think the murder likely occurred around 3:15:

Even throwing out Asia's testimony, that leaves Adnan with a very tight window to meet up with Hae, kill her, meet up with Jay, ditch her car, and return to the school for practice.

Quote
For Adnan to have not been involved, he's got to loan his car and his phone AND go and hang out multiple times with the murderer on the day of the murder. Seems unlikely to me.

No, Adnan only has to hang out with Jay twice. Once to loan him the car and phone, and once to reclaim them. That's it.

And why does it seem unlikely to you that a person would hang out with somebody to whom they loaned their car and phone? Are you in the habit of loaning your car and phone to people who you don't hang out with?

Quote
If you look at this objectively, and remove the "he seems like such a nice boy" angle, I think Adnan's involvement seems extremely likely.

You think Adnan's involvement was extremely likely because he loaned his phone and car to Jay and then hung out with Jay later in order to get the back, and you find it unlikely that he would hang out with Jay twice in one day if they weren't killing somebody together.

Yeah, that's a stupid reason.

And why do people keep suggesting that my reasoning is based on Adnan seeming like a nice guy? I have never suggested that.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on March 30, 2015, 04:23:51 AM
I found this of interest in this case
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocent_prisoner%27s_dilemma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocent_prisoner%27s_dilemma)

The innocent prisoner's dilemma, or 'Parole Deal', is a detrimental effect of a legal system in which admission of guilt can result in reduced sentences or early parole. When an innocent person is wrongly convicted of a crime, legal systems which need the individual to admit guilt, for example as a prerequisite step leading to parole, punish an innocent person for his integrity, and reward a person lacking in integrity. There have been many cases where innocent prisoners were given the choice between freedom, in exchange for admitting guilt, and remaining imprisoned and telling the truth. Individuals have died in prison rather than admit to crimes which they did not commit.

It has been demonstrated in Britain that prisoners who freely admit their guilt are more likely to re-offend than prisoners who maintain their innocence, yet parole officers perceive prisoners claiming innocence to be more likely to re-offend.

United States law professor Daniel Medwed says convicts who go before a parole board maintaining their innocence are caught in a Catch-22 which he calls "the innocent prisoner’s dilemma".[1] A false admission of guilt and remorse by an innocent person at a parole hearing may prevent a later investigation proving their innocence.[2]
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Andrew Clunn on March 30, 2015, 07:26:33 AM
Late to the party, but yeah Adnan did it.  Jay may have been more involved, but he couldn't throw Jay under the bus without admitting that he himself was involved too.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on March 30, 2015, 12:21:52 PM
Late to the party, but yeah Adnan did it.  Jay may have been more involved, but he couldn't throw Jay under the bus without admitting that he himself was involved too.

I certainly would not want you on my jury. . . . . . The reason why I posted the above is because I believe he is eligible for parole but the only way people can often get parole is to admit involvement. What happens if you are innocent.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on March 30, 2015, 01:04:04 PM
Late to the party, but yeah Adnan did it.  Jay may have been more involved, but he couldn't throw Jay under the bus without admitting that he himself was involved too.

I certainly would not want you on my jury. . . . . . The reason why I posted the above is because I believe he is eligible for parole but the only way people can often get parole is to admit involvement. What happens if you are innocent.

Yea, protesting one's innocence is an almost certain road to the denial of parole.  In fact, I think in most states, contrition is a requirement for parole to be approved.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on March 30, 2015, 02:14:04 PM
Yea, protesting one's innocence is an almost certain road to the denial of parole.  In fact, I think in most states, contrition is a requirement for parole to be approved.

I am kind of of the position that maybe that needs to be removed based on this from the wiki article I previously posted

Gabe Tan reported a British conference in 2011, "the dilemma of maintaining innocence", concluded "Denial is not a valid measure of risk. In fact, research has shown that prisoners who openly admit to their crimes have the highest risk of re-offending."[21]

In 2011, Dr Michael Naughton suggested the focus on new evidence by the Criminal Cases Review Commission, rather than an examination of serious problems with evidence at original trials, meant in many cases “that the dangerous criminals who committed these crimes remain at liberty with the potential to commit further serious crimes.”[22]

Robert A. Forde cited two studies at the conference. One, a ten-year study of 180 sex offenders by Harkins, Beech and Goodwill found prisoners who claimed to be innocent were the least likely to be re-convicted, and that those who 'admitted everything', claiming to be guilty, were most likely to re-offend. He also told the conference research by Hanson et al. in 2002, the denial by the prisoner of their offences had no bearing on their likelihood of re-offending, however they are perceived by the parole officers as more likely to re-offend because of their denials.


Basically, my argument is to give him a shot in society. Yes, I know I am a bleeding heart that is willing to even give the secondary actors with Charles Manson a shot and that is not a popular position.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: The Latinist on March 30, 2015, 04:08:26 PM
Yea, protesting one's innocence is an almost certain road to the denial of parole.  In fact, I think in most states, contrition is a requirement for parole to be approved.

I believe that is an unjust condition for parole.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on March 30, 2015, 04:11:18 PM
The argument is, how can a man have paid his debts to society when he won't even acknowledge that he did something debt-worthy? I'm not saying I agree with the argument, and I suspect that the real, underground reason is that a free man is more easily able to do things that may prove his innocence than a guilty one, but it's the one you're going to see.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: The Latinist on March 30, 2015, 04:27:22 PM
The argument is, how can a man have paid his debts to society when he won't even acknowledge that he did something debt-worthy? I'm not saying I agree with the argument, and I suspect that the real, underground reason is that a free man is more easily able to do things that may prove his innocence than a guilty one, but it's the one you're going to see.

I've said it before in threads that were probably lost in the apocalypse, but I do not think that vengeance or ideas like "debt to society" are valid reasons for imprisoning a person.  I do not believe in punitive justice.  Indeed, I believe that the only valid goals of a system of justice are rehabilitation of offenders, protection of the public, and prevention of re-offense. Restrictions on the freedom of offenders are justified only insofar as they are necessary to serve one of those goals, and only for so long as they continue to be necessary to serve those goals. Rehabilitation and protection of the public must always be done by the least restrictive means possible.  I realize that under such a system some people who now receive long prison sentences might be imprisoned for a very short period or perhaps none at all.  On the other hand, some people who posed a serious risk of re-offense might be imprisoned much longer than they are under the current system.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Andrew Clunn on March 30, 2015, 04:54:35 PM
How does being locked up "pay a debt to society?"  It's a BS notion.  Punishment is about preventing repeat offenses by taking past offenders off the street, and deterrence.  Don't fool yourself into thinking that prison serves any other practical purpose.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on March 30, 2015, 05:06:32 PM
How does being locked up "pay a debt to society?"  It's a BS notion.  Punishment is about preventing repeat offenses by taking past offenders off the street, and deterrence.  Don't fool yourself into thinking that prison serves any other practical purpose.

Based on that, he should get parole.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Andrew Clunn on March 30, 2015, 05:07:56 PM
How does being locked up "pay a debt to society?"  It's a BS notion.  Punishment is about preventing repeat offenses by taking past offenders off the street, and deterrence.  Don't fool yourself into thinking that prison serves any other practical purpose.

Based on that, he should get parole.

Except that he's clearly guilty.  Aside from that, sure.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on March 30, 2015, 05:13:52 PM
Except that he's clearly guilty.  Aside from that, sure.

This case is just an "I don't know." Maybe he is and maybe he is not.
I look at a lot of cases and there is weirdness in this case but that does not mean that he is guilty.

I don't see guilt or innocence as mattering to parole except those who might get parole if they plead guilt but don't are more likely to be innocent than one who does accept blame to please a parole board.

Even that does not matter. He seems to have kept his nose clean in prison so I think he should be given a shot out here.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on March 30, 2015, 06:02:09 PM
The argument is, how can a man have paid his debts to society when he won't even acknowledge that he did something debt-worthy? I'm not saying I agree with the argument, and I suspect that the real, underground reason is that a free man is more easily able to do things that may prove his innocence than a guilty one, but it's the one you're going to see.

Yes, that is most certainly the argument, but the argument contains one unstated major premise.  The prisoner is presumed guilty.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on March 30, 2015, 06:21:13 PM
The argument is, how can a man have paid his debts to society when he won't even acknowledge that he did something debt-worthy? I'm not saying I agree with the argument, and I suspect that the real, underground reason is that a free man is more easily able to do things that may prove his innocence than a guilty one, but it's the one you're going to see.

Yes, that is most certainly the argument, but the argument contains one unstated major premise.  The prisoner is presumed guilty.
And I'm sure that if you set up a situation in which people were actually incentivized (by reduced prison times before parole) to proclaim their innocence, then sure, I agree that their could be an issue. I think that what The Latinist is arguing for (and certainly what I'd prefer to see) is that, regardless of whether or not an inmate proclaims guilt or innocence, parole really ought to be determined based on their behavior while incarcerated and *perhaps* the nature of the crime they committed (I say perhaps because a. if an inmate committed a really awful crime, it ought to be baked into the punishment and b. I'm not such a big fan of victim impact statements influencing things one way or the other).

The thing is, whether or not a person will commit a crime when they leave prison has, on the gestalt level, little correlation to how they feel about their incarceration (as The Latinist pointed out, in fact, proclaiming innocence in the face of assumed guilt actually seems to correlate with low recidivism) but with other things like what crime, exactly, was committed (child rape IIRC has a very high recidivism rate, whereas embezzlement may not) and whether or not the inmate has adequate life chances when they get out of prison that will make them not wish to get back into the lifestyle that made them arrive in prison in the first place. Unfortunately, US incarceration philosophy seems to be diametrically opposed to that, finding any way that it can to exclude and ostracize felons, including (especially) those who have presumably "paid their debt to society".
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Eternally Learning on March 30, 2015, 06:23:12 PM
The argument is, how can a man have paid his debts to society when he won't even acknowledge that he did something debt-worthy? I'm not saying I agree with the argument, and I suspect that the real, underground reason is that a free man is more easily able to do things that may prove his innocence than a guilty one, but it's the one you're going to see.

Yes, that is most certainly the argument, but the argument contains one unstated major premise.  The prisoner is presumed guilty.

The prisoner is not presumed guilty.   The prisoner has been found guilty by a court of law.  Doesn't mean they are not innocent, but it's a reasonable premise to have IMO.  Parole is the process for the guilty people to get out of jail while appeal is the process for the innocent.  Giving parole to someome you think is innocent makes no sense. If you think they're innocent then they should have their ruling overturned.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on March 30, 2015, 06:26:52 PM
And thus the prisoner is presumed guilty.   Thank you for lecturing me, I understand what it is quite well. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on March 30, 2015, 06:42:36 PM
The prisoner is not presumed guilty.   The prisoner has been found guilty by a court of law.  Doesn't mean they are not innocent, but it's a reasonable premise to have IMO.  Parole is the process for the guilty people to get out of jail while appeal is the process for the innocent.  Giving parole to someome you think is innocent makes no sense. If you think they're innocent then they should have their ruling overturned.

The important thing to me however is that those who claim innocence are no more likely to recidivism than those who admit guilt. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: The Latinist on March 30, 2015, 07:32:13 PM
I think that what The Latinist is arguing for (and certainly what I'd prefer to see) is that, regardless of whether or not an inmate proclaims guilt or innocence, parole really ought to be determined based on their behavior while incarcerated and *perhaps* the nature of the crime they committed (I say perhaps because a. if an inmate committed a really awful crime, it ought to be baked into the punishment and b. I'm not such a big fan of victim impact statements influencing things one way or the other).

Instead of "behavior while incarcerated" I would say "degree of rehabilitation."  I want a criminal justice system in which those convicted of a crime are not warehoused, but are actively rehabilitated.  Depending on the individual, this might include such things as medical or psychiatric treatment, drug treatment, group and individual therapy, education, community service, restitution, job training, and job and housing placement.  If a person poses an ongoing danger to others or is judged noncompliant with his rehabilitation, his rehabilitation will need to be done on, for lack of a better word, an in-patient basis.  If he is compliant with his rehabilitation program and is not judged to pose an ongoing danger to others, it should be possible to do on an out-patient basis.  Such a person may do well either in his own home or in a lightly-supervised group home.

Quote
The thing is, whether or not a person will commit a crime when they leave prison has, on the gestalt level, little correlation to how they feel about their incarceration (as The Latinist pointed out, in fact, proclaiming innocence in the face of assumed guilt actually seems to correlate with low recidivism)

Although I agree with the first point, I did not make the second and I do not think I have the data to support that statement.  It would not surprise me if it is true, however.

Quote
but with other things like what crime, exactly, was committed (child rape IIRC has a very high recidivism rate, whereas embezzlement may not)

I believe that I have seen statistics showing that child rape carries a high risk of recidivism, but I think that the current system of punitive incarceration and the lack of appropriate rehabilitation probably contributes to this statistic.  I would advocate making decisions about the ongoing risk a person poses to the public on a case-by-case basis.

I also agree with you that the continuing ostracism of felons deprives them of the opportunity to lead a productive, independent life and amounts to perpetual punishment.  I think that remedying that problem will require changing hearts and minds of the public (as, indeed, would instituting a system of rehabilitative justice).
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on March 30, 2015, 09:01:19 PM
I essentially agree with all of what The Latinist says above.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: wastrel on March 30, 2015, 09:21:04 PM
We have unanimous consent from the Tech Admin team.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on March 30, 2015, 09:26:52 PM
Yeah, don't get me wrong, I completely agree that a rehabilitation-centric system is completely the way to go. I know my fellow Americans hate it when we libs do this but Scandinavia, for instance, has extremely low recidivism rates in large part because throughout the process the endgame is "how do we get this person ready to get back into society as soon as possible?" rather than "how can we tell that this person is sufficiently sorry for what they did?". In many cases that means sending people to counseling and job training.

That's not going to fly in the US because it looks like they're "coddling bad guys" and, well, to a great extent they *are* coddling bad guys. If you want bad guys to be taken out of society and then put back in ready to contribute to it, a great deal of coddling is involved. The issue with A Clockwork Orange style retraining isn't so much that it's inhumane (although it is that), it's that it doesn't work because it doesn't actually address the issues that lead the Alexes of the world to commit "ultraviolence"*. If you want to make someone not attempt to destroy a community, you have to give them a role within it, not tell them to go away from it and, even when you nominally allow them back in, put so many hurdles in front of them that actual integration is hard to impossible.

*Incidentally in the original draft of the book, Alex simply gets sick of crime and violence and walks away from it (in spite of the Ludovico treatment, by the way, not because of it). That was cut from the book because - and bear in mind that this book came out in the supposedly strait-laced early 1960s - its editors felt that the audience would find it more believable if he was unrepentant in the end.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on March 31, 2015, 12:01:00 PM
The prisoner is not presumed guilty.   The prisoner has been found guilty by a court of law.  Doesn't mean they are not innocent, but it's a reasonable premise to have IMO.  Parole is the process for the guilty people to get out of jail while appeal is the process for the innocent.  Giving parole to someome you think is innocent makes no sense. If you think they're innocent then they should have their ruling overturned.

I think some linguistic clarification might help here.  We distinguish between legal guilt and legal innocence, and factual guilt and factual innocence.  In a perfect world, those would completely overlap.  In the real world, lots of factually guilty people are not found legally guilty, and unfortunately some factually innocent people are found legally guilty.

It makes perfect sense, then, for the parole board to begin from the fact that the person is legally guilty.  There is then what is referred to as the presumption of regularity; that is, that the verdict, as it has not been impeached, is correct.  If it is incorrect, then there are mechanisms to correct it.  Not availing oneself of those options is attorning to the correctness of the verdict, in the eyes of the law.  That seems perfectly appropriate, in my potentially biased opinion.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on March 31, 2015, 01:39:04 PM
The prisoner is not presumed guilty.   The prisoner has been found guilty by a court of law.  Doesn't mean they are not innocent, but it's a reasonable premise to have IMO.  Parole is the process for the guilty people to get out of jail while appeal is the process for the innocent.  Giving parole to someome you think is innocent makes no sense. If you think they're innocent then they should have their ruling overturned.

I think some linguistic clarification might help here.  We distinguish between legal guilt and legal innocence, and factual guilt and factual innocence.  In a perfect world, those would completely overlap.  In the real world, lots of factually guilty people are not found legally guilty, and unfortunately some factually innocent people are found legally guilty.

It makes perfect sense, then, for the parole board to begin from the fact that the person is legally guilty.  There is then what is referred to as the presumption of regularity; that is, that the verdict, as it has not been impeached, is correct.  If it is incorrect, then there are mechanisms to correct it.  Not availing oneself of those options is attorning to the correctness of the verdict, in the eyes of the law.  That seems perfectly appropriate, in my potentially biased opinion.
Well, again, in that perfect world there are mechanisms to correct an improper guilty verdict, but the reality is that even when they should be utilized they are utilized extremely rarely in this country. In fact, as noted earlier in this thread, the only way Adnan's verdict really has a chance of getting overturned *is* if he can establish factual innocence, not merely legal lack of guilt.

I think that given the fact of imperfection in the system coupled with the fact that proclaiming one's innocence does not correlate with recidivism, whether the inmate thinks they're guilty or not should really just be off the table entirely. I understand this is problematic in a lot of cases, since one thing that pretty much every jurisdiction in the US does when figuring out if a parole-eligible inmate is going to get parole is bring them up and let them speak about their contrition. And, well, it's pretty damn hard to be contrite about something you don't feel that you did. But I think that method is fraught with danger anyway; a charismatic but troubled inmate might be able to fool a parole board but there's no way they're going to fool an entire prison for 5 or 10 years. As such I think that looking at said inmate's behavior - how they've performed in their job, how well they've stayed out of trouble, whether they've chosen to get their GED or some other kind of degree while they've been incarcerated, what kind of volunteer work they're engaging in*, etc. - would be a much, much more effective way of determining if they're ready to re-integrate into society.

In the US, too, we have a long ways to go in terms of making prisons semi-hospitable to inmates who are interested in rehabilitation and reform. Until then, I think one does have to, unfortunately, take the fact that a person being held in a maximum security prison for 5 years is probably not going to be ready for parole, even if it's time for them to be eligible.

*With the caveat that you'd have to make volunteer time available, of course.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on March 31, 2015, 03:15:01 PM
I have been reading about a case of a probably innocent inmate named Charles Erickson.
There is an interesting new issue with him trying to take college courses in prison.
Many schools are going effectively paperless. As well, the internet is an important resource in school
As one might expect, your access is limited in prison.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on April 01, 2015, 12:10:26 PM
(click to show/hide)
Well, again, in that perfect world there are mechanisms to correct an improper guilty verdict, but the reality is that even when they should be utilized they are utilized extremely rarely in this country. In fact, as noted earlier in this thread, the only way Adnan's verdict really has a chance of getting overturned *is* if he can establish factual innocence, not merely legal lack of guilt.

But that is entirely appropriate.  To quote Madam Justice Arbour (at the time of the Ontario Court of Appeal, but later a Supreme Court of Canada justice, the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, i.e. possibly the most accomplished jurist ever):

Quote from: Justice Arbour
Indeed, the presumption of innocence is spent by the verdict, be it a conviction or an acquittal. A conviction does not create a presumption of guilt. It constitutes a legal, conclusive finding of guilt. Like an acquittal, it is enforceable unless and until reversed. After a conviction, there is no presumption left, one way or the other. There is an enforceable finding of guilt.
R v Farinacci (1993), 25 CR (4th) 350 (ONCA) at para 9

The standard for reversal does, in fact, require more than simply raising a reasonable doubt (unless there were irregularities) - a finder of fact (be that judge or jury) has already been convinced beyond a reasonable doubt.  At least in Canada, the standard for a reversal is an "unreasonable verdict", which is a significant burden on the defence, in fact it is often compared to the beyond a reasonable doubt standard the Crown bears at first instance.  The trial process is entitled to a significant presumption of regularity, absent proof to the contrary.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on April 01, 2015, 12:32:36 PM
TheIrreverend:
Perhaps you can answer this question. Assuming somebody (in Canada) is eligible for parole after 14 years.
Is accepting guilt a prerequisite generally to get parole?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on April 01, 2015, 01:59:02 PM
To answer this question requires at least a brief explanation of the conditional release system in Canada, so I apologize for the tl;dr-ness of this post.

Under the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, SC1992, c20 (http://www.canlii.org/canlii-dynamic/en/ca/laws/stat/sc-1992-c-20/latest/sc-1992-c-20.html) in general (doesn't apply to non-federal sentences (less than 2 years) or life sentences) a person is eligible for full parole at 1/3 of their sentence, and day parole some time before that (generally six months for lengthy sentences).  At 2/3 of their sentence (again, federal non-life sentences) the offender has a right to what is called statutory release.  This is a nigh-mandatory release period where the person will still be under warrant, but will be released from the institution on conditions.  A breach of the conditions may see them return to the institution, but unless the warden can demonstrate why the person should not be released (which requires reasonable belief there is a public safety risk) the offender has a right to serve the last 1/3 of their sentence in the community (generally some of that time in a halfway house, but conditions vary depending on the circumstance).  This means that offenders get "paroled" without requiring anything at all, really, after 2/3 of their warrant period.

As for the actual operation of the Parole Board, for those who go before it either after 1/3 of their sentence, or those with life sentences, there are a number of factors the Board must take into consideration.  Under s. 100 of the Act, the

Quote
purpose of conditional release is to contribute to the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe society by means of decisions on the timing and conditions of release that will best facilitate the rehabilitation of offenders and their reintegration into the community as law-abiding citizens.
Section 101(a) requires the Board to consider

Quote
all relevant available information, including the stated reasons and recommendations of the sentencing judge, the nature and gravity of the offence, the degree of responsibility of the offender, information from the trial or sentencing process and information obtained from victims, offenders and other components of the criminal justice system, including assessments provided by correctional authorities;
Ultimately, however, parole is a discretionary grant (unlike statutory release) and the actual practice of the Board I can't speak to; that's out of my bailiwick.  I would imagine that accepting responsibility goes a long way, but at law, at least, it is not necessary to achieve parole.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on April 21, 2015, 02:27:59 PM
Anyone notice there's a new podcast about this case? It appears to be by some deep diving lawyers, one at least is associated with the family.

http://undisclosed-podcast.com/ (http://undisclosed-podcast.com/)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on April 29, 2015, 12:08:34 AM
I will say that what they might lack in polish, they make up for in sheer good research skills. . . .They basically shattered the prosecution timeline.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on April 29, 2015, 08:55:00 AM
Basically,  yes.
Title: Undisclosed Episode 3: Jay's Day
Post by: Desert Fox on May 13, 2015, 03:23:34 PM
The latest episode of Undisclosed argues what I argued previously, that basically Jay's Story is not really his at all but actually the police's story. . . .This is pretty common actually with Amanda Knox, Joseph Dick,  and Jessie Misskelley coming to mind.
Title: Re: Undisclosed Episode 3: Jay's Day
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 13, 2015, 04:03:36 PM
The latest episode of Undisclosed argues what I argued previously, that basically Jay's Story is not really his at all but actually the police's story. . . .This is pretty common actually with Amanda Knox, Joseph Dick,  and Jessie Misskelley coming to mind.

That sounds very plausible, but I don't think it clears Adnan. I maintain what I've said all along: I think Adnan is guilty of murder, but there was not enough evidence to convict him.
Title: Re: Undisclosed Episode 3: Jay's Day
Post by: Desert Fox on May 13, 2015, 06:09:35 PM
That sounds very plausible, but I don't think it clears Adnan. I maintain what I've said all along: I think Adnan is guilty of murder, but there was not enough evidence to convict him.

It sounds like in the next half episode that they are going to take on Jay knowing where the car is. . . .
If the police knew where the car was beforehand and fed it to Jay, what do you have as evidence period?
Now, I think there is definitely reasonable doubt but I don't think we even have reasonable suspicion here.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 13, 2015, 06:22:24 PM
It's an interesting "what if" question, but unless there's some pretty amazing new evidence that shows that to the case, I think Jay knowing where the car was because he was involved seems far more likely.
Title: Re: Undisclosed Episode 3: Jay's Day
Post by: Desert Fox on May 13, 2015, 06:28:26 PM
It's an interesting "what if" question, but unless there's some pretty amazing new evidence that shows that to the case, I think Jay knowing where the car was because he was involved seems far more likely.

Even assuming that he did know where the car is, I think you are basing just too much on that.
I will not argue that he is innocent but I think currently it is basically just no evidence.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 13, 2015, 06:49:37 PM
This episode clearly clearly indicates that Jay was completely fed the story by the police. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 13, 2015, 06:51:37 PM
If you haven't heard this week's episode you should.  It will change your mind. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 13, 2015, 07:18:44 PM
If you haven't heard this week's episode you should.  It will change your mind.

About the car?

I had already assumed Jay's story was fed to him by the police.
Title: Re: Undisclosed Episode 3: Jay's Day
Post by: Desert Fox on May 13, 2015, 08:04:53 PM
This episode clearly clearly indicates that Jay was completely fed the story by the police.

If you haven't heard this week's episode you should.  It will change your mind. 

If he is guilty, there really is no evidence to convict Adnan 
Title: Re: Undisclosed Episode 3: Jay's Day
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 13, 2015, 08:11:07 PM
If he is guilty, there really is no evidence to convict Adnan

Yep, I've always felt that way.

My pet hypothesis is that the cops told Jay he'd get off scot-free if he gave them Adnan, but had to basically write him a new story because in truth, Jay was actually involved in the murder in some fashion--but that Adnan is still the murderer. 
Title: Re: Undisclosed Episode 3: Jay's Day
Post by: Desert Fox on May 13, 2015, 08:14:46 PM
Yep, I've always felt that way.

My pet hypothesis is that the cops told Jay he'd get off scot-free if he gave them Adnan, but had to basically write him a new story because in truth, Jay was actually involved in the murder in some fashion--but that Adnan is still the murderer.

The trouble is that you are speculating without any evidence. . . . .I consider us to just not know.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 13, 2015, 08:39:02 PM
I agree with DF.  Because we do not know does NOT mean that I can suspect Adnan. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 13, 2015, 08:41:18 PM
Also regarding the fact that these same cops were found to have wrongfully convicted another man using the same technique.

It seems that every crucial fact of  the case was fed to Jay by the cops and they ignored all of the contradictory evidence
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on May 13, 2015, 09:22:31 PM
Yeah, my own feeling about this is that I have no idea what Adnan did or didn't do, and that the state could have figured that out in 1999 but instead they tunnel-visioned one guy and neglected to find that person. Although I don't think there's a realistic chance  that Adnan *will* be let out unless his counsel either finds that smoking gun of attorney wrngdoing in this case (apparently it's not enough that his attorney was disbarred shortly after the case, was declared incompetent at another contemporary trial, and made several objectively poor decisions in this one) or leads a path to the actual killer, I also think that the fact that the cops wasted their time framing the wrong guy is not Adnan's fault and he ought to be released immediately.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 13, 2015, 09:59:12 PM
I agree with DF.  Because we do not know does NOT mean that I can suspect Adnan.

I suspect Adnan due to the circumstantial evidence presented in the Serial podcast. Jay's knowledge of the car is a significant piece; if this other podcast has proof that Jay DIDN'T actually know the car's whereabouts, that would be big.

The trouble is that you are speculating without any evidence. . . . .I consider us to just not know.

Sure, that's what we're all doing here: speculating about something that we don't know.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 13, 2015, 10:01:23 PM
There is extremely strong evidence that he didn't know and was in fact fed the location of the car by the police.
Title: Re: Undisclosed Episode 3: Jay's Day
Post by: Desert Fox on May 13, 2015, 10:05:57 PM
I suspect Adnan due to the circumstantial evidence presented in the Serial podcast. Jay's knowledge of the car is a significant piece; if this other podcast has proof that Jay DIDN'T actually know the car's whereabouts, that would be big.

There are too many other possibilities. Her car had unrepaired damage. 
If he looked around town, he might have found it.
There is always the possibility that he did the murder himself.

The only evidence you have is basically Jay said Adnan did it because the timeline was basically destroyed in episode two.

Sure, that's what we're all doing here: speculating about something that we don't know.

If there was some evidence to hang speculation on, there would be more value in your argument.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 13, 2015, 10:10:42 PM
There is extremely strong evidence that he didn't know and was in fact fed the location of the car by the police.

Oh! Yeah, that would sway me heavily. Could you summarize?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 13, 2015, 10:14:40 PM
If you listen to the police interview rather than read the transcript you hear long long pauses in his testimony. If you listen closely you can hear tapping.  This is the police pointing at the thing he is supposed to say

Effectively they very clearly make the case that the police coached Jay through Virtually all of his testimony.

You really need to listen to it to fully understand how damning it is.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 13, 2015, 10:17:35 PM
If you listen to the police interview rather than read the transcript you hear long long pauses in his testimony. If you listen closely you can hear tapping.  This is the police pointing at the thing he is supposed to say

It's a plausible theory, but that's also speculative. Is there any evidence?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 13, 2015, 10:19:00 PM
The evidence is contained in the recordings. It's all audio evidence. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 13, 2015, 10:20:38 PM
If I explain it poorly, you will discount it.  It I explain it well you may weigh it too heavily.  Spend the 60 minutes and listen to the episode so you can decide for yourself
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 13, 2015, 10:28:29 PM
If I explain it poorly, you will discount it.  It I explain it well you may weigh it too heavily.  Spend the 60 minutes and listen to the episode so you can decide for yourself

Eh, I just don't have that great an interest in it. Much more stuff I'd rather spend an hour listening to.

If you don't think you can explain it that's cool, but any material evidence that Jay did not know the car's whereabouts should be pretty simple to describe. It sounds like  it's a (plausible) speculative theory.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 14, 2015, 11:57:34 AM
Jay didn't know where the car was until coached by the police.  It's clear from the audio.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 14, 2015, 12:40:03 PM
Jay didn't know where the car was until coached by the police.  It's clear from the audio.

I thought that was when he was using the car to dispose of her body but I could have misunderstood the podcast
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on May 14, 2015, 12:42:23 PM
Yeah, there's no smoking gun but it's clear from the audio that a. he's being coached,  and b. the cops know exactly what they're doing in keeping the coaching off the audio record. If you only read the transcripts, you can't even really tell that coaching is taking place.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on May 14, 2015, 12:45:09 PM
Jay didn't know where the car was until coached by the police.  It's clear from the audio.

Interesting. Because that's the real lynch pin. The story goes no one knew where the car was, including the police. Jay led the police right to it. So this is not true? The police knew where the car was?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 14, 2015, 12:54:45 PM
Jay didn't know where the car was until coached by the police.  It's clear from the audio.

Interesting. Because that's the real lynch pin. The story goes no one knew where the car was, including the police. Jay led the police right to it. So this is not true? The police knew where the car was?

I believe they are going to speak more on the issue in the next half episode
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on May 14, 2015, 01:23:25 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong (I haven't listened, and don't plan to) but the idea that the tapping is demonstrative of a location being pointed seems like pure supposition.  I mean, it MIGHT be, but is there proof of that beyond tapping?  Lots of people tap pens impatiently.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 14, 2015, 01:36:25 PM
The taps ONLY happen when Jay is pausing and struggling for an answer.  You also hear Jay saying things like 'oh ok' then giving an answer or 'what is that, oh ok' and giving the rest of the answer.   These weird long pauses happen always around the knocking.   
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 14, 2015, 01:39:27 PM
Also these same cops were found to have used similar coaching techniques in another case a few years back.  That man was freed.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on May 14, 2015, 01:49:20 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong (I haven't listened, and don't plan to) but the idea that the tapping is demonstrative of a location being pointed seems like pure supposition.  I mean, it MIGHT be, but is there proof of that beyond tapping?  Lots of people tap pens impatiently.
Sure, there's a chance that's what's happening (and I'm sure that's what the cops will say), but it is at the very least EXTREMELY suspicious. The recordings sound like this:

Jay: blah blah blah trails off (perhaps because he doesn't know what to say)

10-15 seconds of silence

(tapping)

Oh yeah, we met at [street that is marked on the cell phone map]...
Title: Re: Undisclosed Episode 3: Jay's Day
Post by: Desert Fox on May 14, 2015, 02:08:22 PM
Even without the tapping, the pauses are very interesting and he seems to forget that they have two cars and actually apologizes to the cops. . . . .Something like "Sorry, yes we had two cars" and then he again goes off telling his tale as if they have only one car.

If Adnan is involved, whatever happened bears no relationships at all to whatever Jay says.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 14, 2015, 02:28:35 PM
I'm waiting for next week's episode.  They seem to have evidence that Jay did not direct the police to the car. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on May 15, 2015, 09:02:38 AM
Hypothetically:

"Where do you think Adnan would have left the car?"
"In a forest?"
"Really, how would he get back?"
"Yeah, I guess probably near a park."
"Right, or something park like?"
"A strip mall?"
"Exactly. Which strip mall did he leave it at?"
"Well, Southdale?"
"He'd drive all the way to Southdale?"
"Right. We used to hang out at the Oakpark strip mall from time to time."
"Yes. Right. Oakpark makes more sense doesn't it."

A couple hours pass.

"Jay, you have amazing knowledge of this case. The car was at Oakdale behind the garbage bin! You led us right to it! Now just sign this thing we wrote up."

It's amazing how cops can get people to know stuff they didn't actually know.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 15, 2015, 09:36:20 AM
Hypothetically:

"Where do you think Adnan would have left the car?"
"In a forest?"
"Really, how would he get back?"
"Yeah, I guess probably near a park."
"Right, or something park like?"
"A strip mall?"
"Exactly. Which strip mall did he leave it at?"
"Well, Southdale?"
"He'd drive all the way to Southdale?"
"Right. We used to hang out at the Oakpark strip mall from time to time."
"Yes. Right. Oakpark makes more sense doesn't it."

A couple hours pass.

"Jay, you have amazing knowledge of this case. The car was at Oakdale behind the garbage bin! You led us right to it! Now just sign this thing we wrote up."

It's amazing how cops can get people to know stuff they didn't actually know.

Yes,

That's a bit more blatant than what they appeared to have done in this case, but basically that.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 15, 2015, 10:23:20 AM
It's an interesting speculative theory.

It could have happened, but so far as what the folks in the thread have described, there's no evidence that it did.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on May 15, 2015, 12:00:10 PM
If you want to argue against the evidence presented, it might be a good idea to actually peruse the evidence.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 15, 2015, 12:11:11 PM
It's an interesting speculative theory.

It could have happened, but so far as what the folks in the thread have described, there's no evidence that it did.

There are so many cases that I know of where cops lead suspects (or witnesses) by the nose during interrogations interviews, that I am really cynical with regards to police and interviews.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 15, 2015, 01:00:17 PM
If you want to argue against the evidence presented, it might be a good idea to actually peruse the evidence.

Meh. Sounds like an hour of speculation, which doesn't interest me. Like the tapping during the interview thing... "cops tapping on what Jay is supposed to say" is a plausible theory. Was all of Jay's testimony made up whole-cloth and fed to him, was his real story simply shaped into an easier-to-prosecute case?

I think it's fun to speculate in a conversation, but I have no interest in an hour of somebody else's speculations based on facts like "sometimes you can hear tapping when Jay pauses during the interview."

If there are other facts presented, please post them (no interpretation necessary, just the fact--like "there was sometimes audible tapping during Jay's police interview"), because if there ARE more facts involved in the newer series I'd be interested.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 15, 2015, 01:03:21 PM
Jesus. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 15, 2015, 01:05:14 PM
Just looked.  None of what was presented here was mere speculation.  Give the rest of us at least SOME credit for being able to tell the difference
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on May 15, 2015, 01:05:42 PM
I believe that they are presenting factual evidence. If you disagree, then you can certainly go into why. At this point, no offense, but I think you're just being lazy. I'm not saying you have to listen to these podcasts but I am saying that it's a bit annoying that you're taking the time to write "lol I'm unconvinced" but not the actual time to listen to the stuff. I mean, in the time it's taken you to write these posts you probably could have gotten halfway through the Jay episode.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 15, 2015, 01:12:52 PM
Just looked.  None of what was presented here was mere speculation.  Give the rest of us at least SOME credit for being able to tell the difference

Am I being unfair? The only fact I've seen presented from the episode was, "sometimes tapping was heard during instances where Jay stopped speaking during the police interview."

Is that an accurate description?

Was there more?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on May 15, 2015, 01:16:44 PM
Just looked.  None of what was presented here was mere speculation.  Give the rest of us at least SOME credit for being able to tell the difference

Am I being unfair? The only fact I've seen presented from the episode was, "sometimes tapping was heard during instances where Jay stopped speaking during the police interview."

Is that an accurate description?

Was there more?
At this point, you're asking other people to summarize something you don't feel like consuming. People have already attempted to do so. I can't really speak for Belg but I'm not sure I can carry on this conversation when you're merely being willfully ignorant.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 15, 2015, 01:18:26 PM
Just looked.  None of what was presented here was mere speculation.  Give the rest of us at least SOME credit for being able to tell the difference

Am I being unfair? The only fact I've seen presented from the episode was, "sometimes tapping was heard during instances where Jay stopped speaking during the police interview."

Is that an accurate description?

Was there more?

That is not an accurate description, and frankly misrepresents what people who HAVE listened to the episode have been saying in this thread.

I'm not going to do your work for you.  Rather than me spending 2 hours going through the episode, taking time to summarize it into nice sound bites for you and then typing it up in a coherent fashion, I think it's incumbent on you to actually not demand spoon feeding.  Effectively you're asking one of us to spend about 4 hours of work to save you 1 hour of listen.  If you can't spend the 1 hour to listen, then perhaps it's BEST to withhold an opinion completely?

The podcast does NOT make an extraordinary claim, so you shouldn't just dismiss it out of hand.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 15, 2015, 01:21:21 PM
At this point, you're asking other people to summarize something you don't feel like consuming. People have already attempted to do so. I can't really speak for Belg but I'm not sure I can carry on this conversation when you're merely being willfully ignorant.

Look, I've said it like 10 times, I'm not interested in the podcast if it's 99% speculation. What I just posted was the ONLY fact y'all have mentioned from show... I'm genuinely asking, is there more? If so, what? It shouldn't take more than a sentence to succinctly describe it.

ETA: Belg, any mischaracterization was completely unintentional. I'm asking for simplest, dryest description of at least ONE fact presented.

That y'all won't or can't do that makes me think that the show is mostly speculation, in which I have no interest. Y'all are basically telling me, "it was very convincing speculation, you gotta hear it to understand," but I say pah! to that.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 15, 2015, 01:30:16 PM
Fact: This is a weird derail. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 15, 2015, 01:31:49 PM
And again, I say, please give the folks who HAVE listened to it the courtesy of telling the difference between mere speculation and actual evidence. 

As I said, there is a lot more than just some speculation about tapping.

http://www.thefrisky.com/2015-05-13/welp-this-might-be-the-most-insane-and-damaging-serial-update-yet/
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 15, 2015, 01:35:02 PM
http://popdust.com/2015/05/13/undisclosed-jays-wilds-lying-day-adnan/#slide1
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 15, 2015, 01:39:28 PM
And again, I say, please give the folks who HAVE listened to it the courtesy of telling the difference between mere speculation and actual evidence. 

Honestly, I do trust both of you to be intelligent folks, I have every right to believe what you say... but I'm trying to figure out why y'all won't oblige my simple request for one or two succinct examples of facts mentioned in the show. Are you unwilling, or unable?

Quote
As I said, there is a lot more than just some speculation about tapping.

http://www.thefrisky.com/2015-05-13/welp-this-might-be-the-most-insane-and-damaging-serial-update-yet/

I'll make you a deal. Oblige me and list off a couple brief descriptions of facts mentioned in the show (I'm keen to see how I was wrong in my description of the tapping example), and I'll not only read that 1200-word blog post, but I'll ALSO oblige y'all's request to just give the show a try.

(and that one too)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 15, 2015, 02:52:48 PM
Do you guys remember where in the show I should jump to for the bit about the tapping/leading? 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 15, 2015, 02:54:17 PM
Do you guys remember where in the show I should jump to for the bit about the tapping/leading?

I believe around 30 minutes.  If not shortly thereafter.  The stuff leading up to it is important though.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 15, 2015, 03:05:09 PM
Man, you could put some of that audio in skits.  That's hilarious.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 15, 2015, 03:05:18 PM
I have a thought related to this case. . . . .Hae left from school and was never seen again.
All presumptions are that she died very quickly after leaving school.

If Adnan killed her, it has to be really quick and he went right back to school for track (assuming he ever left.)
If he had been a lot older, this might have been more understandable but this would have to be perfectly planned.

At its heart, I just don't think he had the opportunity.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 15, 2015, 03:25:31 PM
Was it proven that he was at track? IIRC the coach could not recall.

About the tapping: I really want to know what I interpreted incorrectly, Belgarath.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 15, 2015, 04:19:51 PM
Was it proven that he was at track? IIRC the coach could not recall.

About the tapping: I really want to know what I interpreted incorrectly, Belgarath.

You said earlier 'oh it's just tapping' as if we're talking about the Baltimore police equivalent of poltergeists.  That's not at all the case, and there is a lot of meat there.  Any summary I did with respect to this would be longer than the two blog posts I link AND would take more time than I care to take.  Simply put, the most expedient method I can think of is to listen to the podcast.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 15, 2015, 04:21:31 PM
Man, you could put some of that audio in skits.  That's hilarious.

Well, that coupled with the fact that these two detectives have been involved in THREE other cases which were thrown out due to shoddy and criminal police work, yea.  It'd be funny if there wasn't someone in jail who shouldn't be there. 

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 15, 2015, 04:31:05 PM
Was it proven that he was at track? IIRC the coach could not recall.

About the tapping: I really want to know what I interpreted incorrectly, Belgarath.

Is it 100%, no but I would say that it is reasonably solid based on what has been presented that he was at track.
The coach did mark attendance and he did mark Adnan late on previous occasions. 

Look, I don't know if Adnan is nice or likeable. Maybe he is the type that would be willing to kill somebody, I don't know.
Using Cameron Todd Willingham, I think given enough time he might have killed his wife in a fight. At issue is that the evidence does not support Willingham having killed his daughters.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on May 15, 2015, 06:17:43 PM
Was it proven that he was at track? IIRC the coach could not recall.

About the tapping: I really want to know what I interpreted incorrectly, Belgarath.
The coach recalled a conversation that he had with Adnan during Ramadan (because it was about Ramadan) and with some specific weather conditions which could not have happened except on January 12th (when there was a track meet at another school and therefore there was no practice that day) or the 13th. Is that a slam dunk 100% refutation of the notion that he missed all of it or, per Jay's testimony, only got in half an hour before practice was over? No, but you're not going to find 100% certainties in the real world and that alone is pretty damning.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 15, 2015, 06:20:57 PM
You said earlier 'oh it's just tapping' as if we're talking about the Baltimore police equivalent of poltergeists.  That's not at all the case, and there is a lot of meat there.  Any summary I did with respect to this would be longer than the two blog posts I link AND would take more time than I care to take.  Simply put, the most expedient method I can think of is to listen to the podcast.

I'll go ahead and check out the episode this week, but a fact shouldn't need any explaining at all. If the fact sounds less important than it possibly is when it's only described sans-speculation and circumstantial factors (like the cops' dirty past), so be it... but that's the foundation that I'm curious about.

I fully recognize what the tapping could be, and even probably is--but that part is obviously speculative (unless y'all are refusing to share relevant facts just to be mean). The way it's been described in the thread, "sometimes you can hear tapping when Jay pauses" is indeed the fact that our speculation is then based upon. 

Was it proven that he was at track? IIRC the coach could not recall.

About the tapping: I really want to know what I interpreted incorrectly, Belgarath.
The coach recalled a conversation that he had with Adnan during Ramadan (because it was about Ramadan) and with some specific weather conditions which could not have happened except on January 12th (when there was a track meet at another school and therefore there was no practice that day) or the 13th. Is that a slam dunk 100% refutation of the notion that he missed all of it or, per Jay's testimony, only got in half an hour before practice was over? No, but you're not going to find 100% certainties in the real world and that alone is pretty damning.

Thanks, that's the kind of testimony I was asking for. Due to fallibility of memory: if that's a recent revelation, I trust it 0%; it if twas something the coach said at the time, I think it's worth considering, but pretty shaky as far as evidence goes. I'll quit my yammering until after I listen to the episode sometime this week.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 15, 2015, 06:22:12 PM
Was it proven that he was at track? IIRC the coach could not recall.

About the tapping: I really want to know what I interpreted incorrectly, Belgarath.
The coach recalled a conversation that he had with Adnan during Ramadan (because it was about Ramadan) and with some specific weather conditions which could not have happened except on January 12th (when there was a track meet at another school and therefore there was no practice that day) or the 13th. Is that a slam dunk 100% refutation of the notion that he missed all of it or, per Jay's testimony, only got in half an hour before practice was over? No, but you're not going to find 100% certainties in the real world and that alone is pretty damning.

Agreed with that, but the only evidence they have tying Adnan to the body is the testimony of Jay, and this podcast has made me essentially eliminate everything Jay has said.  So now, throw out the testimony of Jay and what do we have?  Nothing.

After Serial, I thought 'oh Jay was involved in this somehow' but now I think Jay got busted for something and the police basically coached him into the confession to avoid going to jail for something else.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 15, 2015, 06:22:54 PM
Man, you could put some of that audio in skits.  That's hilarious.

So you listened to the second half?  What did you think after listening?

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 15, 2015, 06:51:34 PM
After Serial, I thought 'oh Jay was involved in this somehow' but now I think Jay got busted for something and the police basically coached him into the confession to avoid going to jail for something else.

That is not uncommon actually. Look at Michael Carson with the West Memphis Three.
If a person with a conviction over their head can turn evidence to get off, they will.
This is why I actually think that jailhouse snitches should be not allowed.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 15, 2015, 07:22:27 PM

This is why I actually think that jailhouse snitches should be not allowed.

I don't think I could categorically rule them out, but I do think there should be a great deal of scrutiny on WHY they're doing what they're doing.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 15, 2015, 08:30:40 PM

This is why I actually think that jailhouse snitches should be not allowed.

I don't think I could categorically rule them out, but I do think there should be a great deal of scrutiny on WHY they're doing what they're doing.

I consider that they could be used to generate leads or if any confessions are recorded but not on their own.
There was a man executed in part due to a jailhouse snitch and a woman who was almost executed.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 15, 2015, 11:15:04 PM
Man, you could put some of that audio in skits.  That's hilarious.

So you listened to the second half?  What did you think after listening?

Most of it.  And it seems like a clear case of some dirty cops making sure they get their guy.

Somewhere out there is a murderer who really, really appreciates all of their hard work.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 15, 2015, 11:19:00 PM
Most of it.  And it seems like a clear case of some dirty cops making sure they get their guy.

Somewhere out there is a murderer who really, really appreciates all of their hard work.

Odds are pretty good that he is in prison for another charge although one cannot be certain
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Soldier of FORTRAN on May 15, 2015, 11:31:44 PM
If he is, he has thoughts of that time he got away with murder to keep him warm. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 15, 2015, 11:46:43 PM
If he is, he has thoughts of that time he got away with murder to keep him warm.

If it is Adnan who murdered her, I want some kind of real evidence not the testimony who has repeatedly changed his story.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 16, 2015, 09:58:26 AM
He seems to have changed his story at the direction of the police.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 16, 2015, 07:17:17 PM
He seems to have changed his story at the direction of the police.

I actually prefer to argue that he did not describe his idea of the crime but the investigator's idea of the crime  >:(
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 19, 2015, 05:48:24 PM
So the Addendum came out yesterday for Episode 3:

I will summarize for Drunken Idaho because he's so damn busy he can't listen to 30 minutes of audio :P  (luv ya buddy)

The police did not get a story from Jay, but rather Jay got the story from the police.  How do we know that?

1) In Jay's first interview he said that he received a phone call from one place.  The police had an inaccurate map of cell locations.  When he was asked where he was when a call came in he started to say something, there was a <KNOCK KNOCK> <PAUSE> and suddenly he says where the inaccurate cell tower map indicates (McDonalds vs Jen's house)  In the second interview, he indicated something different (Jen's house)  Their documents were wrong but they coached him to make the story align with the inaccurate documents.

2) According to Serial (and the trial testimony) they learned about Jay from Jen on Feb 26 1999.  But that's not true.  Jay had met with the police on or around the 20th-22nd of the month.  How do we know?  Jay says he stonewalled them in his latest interview.  He KNEW that the police were coming for him, which contradicts the official record.  In his interview, he said he knew for days that the police were coming for him.  Additionally Jay's boss said (and it's documented in work records) that Jay missed work on the 21st to be questioned.  Jay missed work several other times to meet the police.  He missed work on the 21st, the 26th, and March 5th.  As of March 10, the official record says that Jay only met with the cops on Feb 26th.  Additionally there are other witnesses that state they saw Jay talking to the cops around the 20th. (Neighbor Boy)  He further states that Jay said the police found him using Adnan's cell records well before Feb 26th.

3) On January 27th, Jay was arrested and charged with resisting arrest and disorderly conduct.  That charge was SUSPENDED on March 5th.  On March 5th they believe that Jay met with the Prosecutors office.  They have documentation that Jen met with the prosecutor on March 4th and this information wasn't disclosed in trial, they allege that jay missing work on March 5th indicates he met with the prosecutor and this meeting got the charges suspended.  There are usually conditions associated with these suspensions (such as testifying at trial) but they have been unable to find records of these conditions.  Effectively they are alleging that Jay was coerced to testify in exchange for dropping the charges against him.  (My speculation:  Interesting timeline on this, wonder when they had Adnan's cell records????)

4) Jay leading the cops to Hae's car - they disagree on this, but only on a couple of minor things.  One thinks that Jay didn't lead the cops to the car, but rather the cops told him where it was and he lead them there.  The other thinks that it doesn't matter BECAUSE Jay admits to spotting the car AFTER the date of the murder.  Doing his normal routine he came across the car AFTER the crime.  Days later (Audio for all of this starts around 15:30) 

5) Jay talks about grey gloves in the audio, but the transcript talks about red gloves.  (There was an untested Red fiber at the burial scene)

6) Maryland is different than other states.  A statement made by a witness to police that is recorded may be admitted as evidence.  In most other jurisdictions, it can only be used to impeach testimony given at trial.

And now there's this:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/19/living/adnan-syed-serial-appeal-case-feat/

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 20, 2015, 10:02:04 PM
I had previously suggested that Jay might have been looking for the car and found it on its own. . .
If it was on a normal travel route, it indicates that it was not really hidden.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on May 20, 2015, 11:16:24 PM
I have an episode on my "podcasts usb" currently plugged into my automobile... but it definitely has to wait until after I'm through the most recent Hardcore History.  ;)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on May 21, 2015, 09:30:19 AM
Okay, curious what the evidence is the cops found the car and then convinced Jay he led the cops to the car (via, say, a process I sketched out previously). However, I can also see a scenario where the cops bring in Jay because he's a black drug dealer known to them and they figure he MUST know something. And they threaten him with all kinds of ways they can destroy his life unless he gives them something. And Jay remembers seeing Hae's car and gives them that.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 21, 2015, 11:57:45 AM
Okay, curious what the evidence is the cops found the car and then convinced Jay he led the cops to the car (via, say, a process I sketched out previously). However, I can also see a scenario where the cops bring in Jay because he's a black drug dealer known to them and they figure he MUST know something. And they threaten him with all kinds of ways they can destroy his life unless he gives them something. And Jay remembers seeing Hae's car and gives them that.

To be a fly on the wall in the pre-interview
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 21, 2015, 06:52:03 PM
I think it may be the second one, mindme. Arrest on the 27th. Changing stories.  March 5 charges suspended presumably with the promise to be dropped after he testifies. 

Changing story is shown because they have inaccurate maps and Jay's story matches the maps.  When the maps get corrected, Jays story again changes to match the maps. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 21, 2015, 08:10:20 PM
Is anybody here at all familiar with the Ryan Ferguson case?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_W._Ferguson

Edit: The reason why I bring it up is because of how easily a person can be fed a story of a crime by the cops.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Gerbig on May 21, 2015, 08:44:18 PM
I was on team guilty at the end of serial, now im filled with other sorts of ambiguity
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on May 22, 2015, 02:41:54 PM
I was on team guilty at the end of serial, now im filled with other sorts of ambiguity
Yeah, to me it always hung on Jay knowing about the car. I figured if Jay lead them to the car, then we knew for sure Jay was involved somehow and it seemed most plausible that Adnan was involved somehow as well.
If I can be convinced that Jay didn't lead the cops there, well then, that blows it all to hell.

Crazy bad timing on Adnan's part for Hae's murder, but that isn't even close enough to convince me he should be in jail for it, let alone having even been involved. It's been clear that the jury wrongfully convicted regardless of my opinion on Adnan's innocence.
Hopefully an innocent man goes free.

Now who actually murdered this poor girl, and why? Sad.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 22, 2015, 04:51:40 PM

Now who actually murdered this poor girl, and why? Sad.

That is the big question.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 25, 2015, 02:10:27 PM
Looks like from the latest update, the police lied to the witness Asia and lied in court about what she said. . . .oops.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Gerbig on May 25, 2015, 02:11:54 PM
Looks like from the latest update, the police lied to the witness Asia and lied in court about what she said. . . .oops.

Is that enough for a mistrial?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 25, 2015, 02:40:26 PM
Looks like from the latest update, the police lied to the witness Asia and lied in court about what she said. . . .oops.

Is that enough for a mistrial?

I don't know but let us say for argument sake that Adnan really is guilty, you cannot get a fair legal system from dishonest officials.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on May 25, 2015, 03:18:52 PM
Just to be clear, no one should have a problem with cops lying to witnesses or accused persons.  That's clearly a valuable investigative tool.

Lying in court, well that's perjury.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 25, 2015, 03:33:13 PM
Just to be clear, no one should have a problem with cops lying to witnesses or accused persons.  That's clearly a valuable investigative tool.

Lying in court, well that's perjury.

Telling a witness that they testimony is not needed and that the defendant got a fair trial in order that they do not testify, that is fine with you. . . .I think we need some philosophical changes within the legal system.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on May 25, 2015, 03:35:09 PM
I'm not commenting on the specifics of these facts, as I don't know them.  I just want to be clear that the ability of police to lie to accused persons/witnesses is one of the most important investigative tools they have, and no one should be shocked that they do so.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 25, 2015, 04:01:24 PM
I'm not commenting on the specifics of these facts, as I don't know them.  I just want to be clear that the ability of police to lie to accused persons/witnesses is one of the most important investigative tools they have, and no one should be shocked that they do so.

There are jurisdictions where the police are not allowed to lie to suspects yet they still arrest and convict people. . . . .As such, I would argue that it is not a tool which is actually required.
Title: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on May 25, 2015, 04:17:51 PM
Required != important.  There are lots of rules of evidence which protect unreliable confessions from being admitted in court.

I should note, I am currently working on a file where the defence is claiming a false confession and I am seeking to admit it as reliable.  Just so my biases are out in the open.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on May 25, 2015, 05:21:48 PM
Just to be clear, no one should have a problem with cops lying to witnesses or accused persons.  That's clearly a valuable investigative tool.

Lying in court, well that's perjury.
I have a problem with it.  Quick examples:  Telling a defendant that you have DNA evidence that will put them on death row, then plea bargaining a false confession.

Telling a defendant that they are not under arrest, so there is no need for a lawyer.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 25, 2015, 05:23:16 PM
Required != important.  There are lots of rules of evidence which protect unreliable confessions from being admitted in court.

I should note, I am currently working on a file where the defence is claiming a false confession and I am seeking to admit it as reliable.  Just so my biases are out in the open.

How many of your trials would survive the ECHR if you were subject to them?
I consider that should be the standard you should work with.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on May 25, 2015, 05:26:59 PM
My trials are subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is a very recent (1982) rights document.  If there is some particular element of the ECHR you would like to point to, I'm happy to look.

If you're interested in the Canadian law on confessions, I recommend looking up Oickle (SCC, 2000).
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 25, 2015, 05:30:11 PM

Looks like from the latest update, the police lied to the witness Asia and lied in court about what she said. . . .oops.

For clarity.  That wasn't the police.  THAT WAS THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 25, 2015, 05:34:01 PM
Rev

For clarity, the claim is twofold:

1) The DA lied to the witness saying that her testimony wasn't important and that she should not help the defense because it could let a murderer go free and;

2) misrepresented in court the facts that the witness would testify to.   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 25, 2015, 05:34:38 PM
My trials are subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is a very recent (1982) rights document.  If there is some particular element of the ECHR you would like to point to, I'm happy to look.

If you're interested in the Canadian law on confessions, I recommend looking up Oickle (SCC, 2000).

If I am reading the ECHR correct
1. As soon as you are a suspect, you are suppose to be informed of that fact and you are suppose to be given immediate access to a lawyer.
2. That lawyer is permitted whenever the suspect is interrogated. I think it is pretty horrible actually that Canada does not even allow a lawyer present during those interrogation.
3. Anybody may end an interview at any time. You said that a witness / suspect can continued to be questioned, they just don't have to answer. 
4. Law enforcement is not suppose to use  deceptive tactics with regards to suspects.

To be honest, except for the death penalty and generally harsher penalties in the US, I would actually prefer to be tried by US law than Canadian law to be honest due to 2 and 3.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 25, 2015, 05:35:18 PM
The episode is only 9 minutes long and was posted Friday


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 25, 2015, 05:35:48 PM
For clarity.  That wasn't the police.  THAT WAS THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY!

I thought I heard the name "Detective [Insert Name]"
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 25, 2015, 05:36:16 PM
Let me re listen. I could swear it was the DA


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Gerbig on May 25, 2015, 05:44:12 PM
The episode is only 9 minutes long and was posted Friday


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dude,  do you know how busy he is, 9 mins may as well be an eternity!
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 25, 2015, 05:49:28 PM
Just re-listened.   It was Kevin Urek?? The district attorney.  It is alleged that he falsely represented what Asia said.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 25, 2015, 05:51:22 PM
Let me re listen. I could swear it was the DA

Trying to download it again myself but in a bad internet area. . . .Kevin Urick, a prosecutor.
You were right and I was wrong.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on May 25, 2015, 09:20:25 PM
Just to be clear, no one should have a problem with cops lying to witnesses or accused persons.  That's clearly a valuable investigative tool.

Lying in court, well that's perjury.
He was no longer investigating the crime. I'm not saying that what the guy did is straight up "he should lose his job" unethical but it was sleazy.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on May 25, 2015, 09:21:46 PM
My trials are subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is a very recent (1982) rights document.  If there is some particular element of the ECHR you would like to point to, I'm happy to look.

If you're interested in the Canadian law on confessions, I recommend looking up Oickle (SCC, 2000).

If I am reading the ECHR correct
1. As soon as you are a suspect, you are suppose to be informed of that fact and you are suppose to be given immediate access to a lawyer.
2. That lawyer is permitted whenever the suspect is interrogated. I think it is pretty horrible actually that Canada does not even allow a lawyer present during those interrogation.
3. Anybody may end an interview at any time. You said that a witness / suspect can continued to be questioned, they just don't have to answer. 
4. Law enforcement is not suppose to use  deceptive tactics with regards to suspects.

To be honest, except for the death penalty and generally harsher penalties in the US, I would actually prefer to be tried by US law than Canadian law to be honest due to 2 and 3.

You're correct.  Canada, unlike the US, does not necessarily put individual rights at the top of the hierarchy; we are much more of a collectivist society than you are.  As the Supreme Court noted in R v Singh, 2007 SCC 48 at paras 45 & 47:

Quote from: Justice Charron
Mr. Singh’s proposition [that once the right to silence is asserted that questioning must cease] ignores the state interest in the effective investigation of crime.  The Court in Hebert stressed the importance of achieving a proper balance between the individual’s right to choose whether to speak to the authorities and society’s interest in uncovering the truth in crime investigations.   As I stated earlier, the suspect may be the most fruitful source of information.  While the  fact of detention unquestionably triggers the need for additional checks on police interrogation techniques because of the greater vulnerability of the detainee, the moment of detention does nothing to reduce the suspect’s value as an important source of information.  Provided that the detainee’s rights are adequately protected, including the freedom to choose whether to speak or not, it is in society’s interest that the police attempt to tap this valuable source.

[...]

Mr. Singh takes particular issue with the leeway afforded to the police in questioning the detainee, even after he has retained counsel and has asserted his choice to remain silent.  He submits that courts have erroneously interpreted the underlined passage above as permitting the police to ignore a detainee’s expressed wish to remain silent and to use “legitimate means of persuasion”.  I say two things in response to this argument.  First, the use of legitimate means of persuasion is indeed permitted under the present rule — it was expressly endorsed by this Court in Hebert.  This approach is part of the critical balance that must be maintained between individual and societal interests.  Second, the law as it stands does not permit the police to ignore the detainee’s freedom to choose whether to speak or not, as contended.  Under both common law and Charter  rules, police persistence in continuing the interview, despite repeated assertions by the detainee that he wishes to remain silent, may well raise a strong argument that any subsequently obtained statement was not the product of a free will to speak to the authorities (emphasis added).

This is the balance which we have chosen to strike.  I realize this runs counter to the American notion of individualism, but I'll take the Canadian justice system over the American without any hesitation.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on May 25, 2015, 09:25:09 PM
Just to be clear, no one should have a problem with cops lying to witnesses or accused persons.  That's clearly a valuable investigative tool.

Lying in court, well that's perjury.
He was no longer investigating the crime. I'm not saying that what the guy did is straight up "he should lose his job" unethical but it was sleazy.

Ok, maybe in this case it wasn't ok; as I said, I don't know the facts here (and no, I'm not too busy to listen, I've just stopped caring about this case, to be honest).  I'm not suggesting carte blanche for cops to lie.  I'm just saying that a blanket rule preventing the cops from lying to suspects/witnesses is an unnecessary restriction on investigation.  I would say that cops lying other than as a method to further the investigation is probably not ok.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 25, 2015, 09:54:13 PM
Do you differentiate between cops and attorneys?   I tend to agree with you that cops should be able to lie in investigations but I'm a bit concerned about lying to obtain a confession. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 25, 2015, 10:22:22 PM
Do you differentiate between cops and attorneys?   I tend to agree with you that cops should be able to lie in investigations but I'm a bit concerned about lying to obtain a confession. 

If you have never watched it, you should watch "The Confessions" from PBS. It is very eye opening
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/the-confessions/
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 25, 2015, 10:24:04 PM
Saw it.  It's very good


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 25, 2015, 10:36:49 PM
This is the balance which we have chosen to strike.  I realize this runs counter to the American notion of individualism, but I'll take the Canadian justice system over the American without any hesitation.

Every system has problems but somehow those under the ECHR can do both.

Interestingly, I read somebody who claims to be an investigator who also argues that he(assuming he) never lies to a defendant. He argues that his word is his body and he will always treat those he interviews with honesty. Could be lying of course and may not even be a detective.

There are those who declare that not allowing enhanced interrogation techniques needlessly ties investigators hands.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on May 26, 2015, 04:29:41 AM



There are those who declare that not allowing enhanced interrogation techniques needlessly ties investigators hands.


That's a bit of a stretch.  Vaguely insinuating that someone in favor of allowing the police to lie is somehow accepting of torture.  They are two completely different things. 




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 26, 2015, 04:40:59 AM
That's a bit of a stretch.  Vaguely insinuating that someone in favor of allowing the police to lie is somehow accepting of torture.  They are two completely different things. 

I still think that police can investigate crimes and get convictions without deceptive tactics.

The latest episode of Undisclosed is up called "28 days". Most of the way through and one takeway is the only subject they looked at in any detail was Annan.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on May 26, 2015, 07:19:47 AM

Do you differentiate between cops and attorneys?   I tend to agree with you that cops should be able to lie in investigations but I'm a bit concerned about lying to obtain a confession. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes, 100%.  Though in Canada the Crown (equivalent of the DA/USA) is not involved in the investigation in the same way.  But yes, a lawyer has a duty of honesty and candour, and would be in breach of both if they told lies in the course of their job.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 26, 2015, 06:21:06 PM
You're correct.  Canada, unlike the US, does not necessarily put individual rights at the top of the hierarchy; we are much more of a collectivist society than you are.  As the Supreme Court noted in R v Singh, 2007 SCC 48 at paras 45 & 47:

In general a society where individual rights are compressed or sacrificed for the "superior interests" of the community is or risks to be an extremely dangerous place, as the history of the 20th century abundantly shows.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on May 26, 2015, 06:22:41 PM
As I said, I'm quite happy with the Canadian approach to balancing rights.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 26, 2015, 09:14:04 PM
As I said, I'm quite happy with the Canadian approach to balancing rights.

Obviously, I disagree and I think my position is supported by history
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on May 26, 2015, 09:15:45 PM
When Canada inevitably becomes a dystopia, I promise to allow you to tell me "I told you so".
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on May 26, 2015, 09:23:03 PM
When Canada inevitably becomes a dystopia, I promise to allow you to tell me "I told you so".

Have you ever read this story?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ones_Who_Walk_Away_from_Omelas
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on May 27, 2015, 02:33:45 PM
I realize this runs counter to the American notion of individualism, but I'll take the Canadian justice system over the American without any hesitation.

I do notice lots of people in Canada seem to take a trial by judge over trial by jury option.  We do seem to be more trusting of our judges.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: TheIrreverend on May 27, 2015, 02:36:08 PM
Yeah, trial by jury is (thankfully, in my opinion) dying a slow death, other than where it is required by law.  The old adage goes that if you're innocent, you want trial before a judge, but if you're guilty, go before a jury.  Not always true (especially if child or women victims are involved), but a general rule.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 02, 2015, 12:56:32 PM
There is a new supplement out and glad the host also stated that she does not really like the polygraph.
I do like the explanation of the car and the cell phone. Jay did not barrow the cell phone but it was in the glove box.
On the stand, Jay admitted that he was not actually loaned the cell phone.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 04, 2015, 12:37:08 AM
I just created my account here... Long time skeptic and listener, just never got around to posting here before.

After spending probably too much time segueing/facepalming on the serial subreddit, I think I might be losing my mind.  I need to confirm that the preponderance of actual skeptical thinkers are coming to the same conclusion as I am.... I hope.

What is the collective opinion (if there is one) around here as to Adnan's guilt?  I fluctuated back and forth listening to Serial, but as time has worn on and Undisclosed has been released, I am finding it harder and harder to think he was rightfully convicted.   However my mind is awash with reddit people screaming "logic!" at me from the guilty camp.... As if they invented the term.  And man on reddit there's a ton of them.

Is this similar to the creationists who study logic and throw around the terminology fluently but incorrectly?  At this point I feel like my brain just hurts.  I need to cheat a bit and find out what other true critical thinkers are thinking.  Thoughts?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 04, 2015, 12:42:45 AM
I think the (so-far) universal opinion here is that there was not nearly enough evidence to convict Adnan of murder.

The opinions on whether or not he still did it vary; I think a majority in this thread believe he's wholly innocent (or at least that there's no evidence whatsoever that he's guilty). I agree that there's basically no evidence that he's guilty, but I lean toward him being guilty (in a "where would you place your bet if you had to" sort of way).
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 04, 2015, 12:52:57 AM
Thank you. All of those positions, yours included, sound totally reasonable.  I too think that it's possible Adnan is guilty, however  that it has nothing whatsoever to do with anything the state presented at trial.  I personally wouldn't put my bet on it though.

Personally I think the most likely explanation is that Somethjng similar to what happened to that Jada Lambert girl six months earlier probably happened to Hae.  Women who end up murdered are statistically most often killed by the boyfriend/ex/husband/ex... But not teenagers.  I don't think the statistics are anywhere near as strong in that age group.

 Why the police so flippantly dismissed investigating Don, the current (and much older) boyfriend, is beyond me. 

Thank you for your quick reply :)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 04, 2015, 01:00:00 AM
I'm not sure I can say who did it but the Undisclosed podcast seems to be systematically removing Adnan from the group of people who COULD have done it. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 04, 2015, 01:06:08 AM
I'm not sure I can say who did it but the Undisclosed podcast seems to be systematically removing Adnan from the group of people who COULD have done it. 

I'm less convinced than you based on what I've heard so far... but I'll give you a more detailed response when I've got more to say.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 04, 2015, 02:30:27 PM
If it could be proven that he left with her in her car that afternoon, that by itself would likely be enough for a guilty verdict.
Everything else could be wrong and it would still be strong evidence of guilt.

Right now though, we have timeline issues with it and weak evidence that he was first in the library and then at track practice right afterwards. There are real issues with the time frame involved because it seems almost certain that it had to happen very soon after school.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 08, 2015, 10:14:58 PM
So today's episode:

The state's timeline is impossible based on irrefutable evidence from the autopsy.   The body exhibited full frontal lividity.  This means it laid on its face and NOT in the trunk of the car for AT LEAST 8 hours.  This means that all of the evidence, including the testimony of Jay CANNOT be correct.  Hae  cannot have been buried before midnight. 

Also Hae's car had green grass all up in the wheel well.  The state maintains that the car was parked in its found position for 6 weeks.  Green grass cannot be in such a place for 6 weeks, it would have died. 

Good episode.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 08, 2015, 10:21:58 PM
Car was recently moved to the location it was found then? I have not listen to it yet.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 08, 2015, 10:33:54 PM
Yes.  That's the contention.  They have a picture of the car on their website


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 08, 2015, 11:36:00 PM
I usually to listen the podcast while walking my dog but decided to listen to it now. . . . .Damn, this is damning.

Somebody has to have had a place where the body might be left lain flat for eight to ten hours.
Could not have been the car where she could not have fit in the trunk.
Assuming Adnan, maybe if he had keys to his Mosque? Points me more in the direction of her boyfriend however.
Maybe he was afraid of being accused of statutory rape?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 10, 2015, 12:36:15 PM
Sounds like a whole lot of authoritative declarations based on assumptions...

(what type of grass? some grass grows well in the shade. Was the car in a position where some sunlight could reach under the car? Why couldn't Hae's body have been prone, but with the legs folded up or twisted? This would still result in frontal lividity...)

yesyes, I'm still finding the time to listen to some episodes. Waiting till I can give it full attention, hopefully soon. :)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on June 10, 2015, 01:45:36 PM
Good Lord, why do you feel the need to carry water for this controversial prosecution to the point where you are making excuses to dismiss evidence you have not even heard?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 10, 2015, 02:44:46 PM
Good Lord, why do you feel the need to carry water for this controversial prosecution to the point where you are making excuses to dismiss evidence you have not even heard?

Feh?

I'm just saying: all I've seen in this thread are declarations based on assumptions. It's really rilin' y'all up when I express that opinion, but that's still all that's been offered.

You (and Belgarath) are right to call me out for not actually listening to it yet. Swear to Jebus I will. I'd like to pick an episode, present what I've heard, and then discuss any beefs I have with it... should I start with the first, or is there a particularly strong episode you'd like me to start with?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 10, 2015, 02:57:27 PM
Sounds like a whole lot of authoritative declarations based on assumptions...

(what type of grass? some grass grows well in the shade. Was the car in a position where some sunlight could reach under the car? Why couldn't Hae's body have been prone, but with the legs folded up or twisted? This would still result in frontal lividity...)

yesyes, I'm still finding the time to listen to some episodes. Waiting till I can give it full attention, hopefully soon. :)

Think of yourself in the trunk . . . .I am using my 2001 Mustang trunk to get a rough picture. I am a bit larger than she is but I am not a big person. I always have stuff in there (as she did) as well but will pretend it is not there. I could easily fold me legs over my body if I was on my back but laying on my stomach, tucking legs under me just seems really strange. Also, when the car moves, I think the tendency would be to fall onto the side.

I would argue that while being on her back would be possible, pretzeled on one side is by far the most likely situation.    The evidence does not support her being on her back either.

Edit: I did think of something however. With my 2001 Mustang, I can slide down the two rear seats. I assume that you could do the same with the Nissan. Could she have been lain outstretch in that manner and covered with something? Assuming that is possible however, it would be scary as hell to have somebody in the car in that manner. Devon Guzman was however carried in the back seat of her car covered up after her murder. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 10, 2015, 03:03:50 PM
Sounds like a whole lot of authoritative declarations based on assumptions...

(what type of grass? some grass grows well in the shade. Was the car in a position where some sunlight could reach under the car? Why couldn't Hae's body have been prone, but with the legs folded up or twisted? This would still result in frontal lividity...)

yesyes, I'm still finding the time to listen to some episodes. Waiting till I can give it full attention, hopefully soon. :)

Think of yourself in the trunk . . . .I am using my 2001 Mustang trunk to get a rough picture. I am a bit larger than she is but I am not a big person. I always have stuff in there (as she did) as well but will pretend it is not there. I could easily fold me legs over my body if I was on my back but laying on my stomach, tucking legs under me just seems really strange. Also, when the car moves, I think the tendancy would be to fall onto the side.
I would argue that while being on her back would be possible, pretzeled on one side is by far the most likely situation.   

This is kind of what I'm getting at with my lazy-pre-listening conjecture... we can come up with a whole bunch of "maybe this happened" scenarios, but it's not exactly hard evidence.

If they're saying there was frontal lividity from head to toe, then I see how "knotted up in a trunk for a long time" doesn't seem likely, but all that proves is that she wasn't knotted up for a long time after death... anyway, to prevent pants/belgs' heads from exploding I promise to not post here again until I've listened (but please suggest a particularly strong episode, as I doubt I'll want to listen to the whole series).
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 10, 2015, 03:12:53 PM
This is kind of what I'm getting at with my lazy-pre-listening conjecture... we can come up with a whole bunch of "maybe this happened" scenarios, but it's not exactly hard evidence.

If they're saying there was frontal lividity from head to toe, then I see how "knotted up in a trunk for a long time" doesn't seem likely, but all that proves is that she wasn't knotted up for a long time after death... anyway, to prevent pants/belgs' heads from exploding I promise to not post here again until I've listened (but please suggest a particularly strong episode, as I doubt I'll want to listen to the whole series).

Would not, if the legs were tucked under her body, the blood have settled in her legs instead of her torso.
One of the things you get, unless the hosts are lying, is that the prosecution did a really shitty job of documenting things.
Seems like every time  there should be an item of evidence to try to figure out exactly what occurred, that is missing.
They did not, for example, ask those around  where the car was found what they might have seen.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 10, 2015, 05:03:24 PM
Aarg, I hate this. . . .I did not lay in my trunk but laid a blanket down behind my car. I then laid face down and folded up my legs.
I am 5'10" tall. I was basically the width of my car in that manner. It might be possible to put Hai in the back based on this.   
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Gerbig on June 10, 2015, 05:17:59 PM
anyway, to prevent pants/belgs' heads from exploding I promise to not post here again until I've listened (but please suggest a particularly strong episode, as I doubt I'll want to listen to the whole series).

You would think this would be a given after arguing about it for pages....
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 10, 2015, 06:27:20 PM
Aarg, I hate this. . . .I did not lay in my trunk but laid a blanket down behind my car. I then laid face down and folded up my legs.
I am 5'10" tall. I was basically the width of my car in that manner. It might be possible to put Hai in the back based on this.


But, lets assume for a second you could put her on her stomach and somehow wedge her legs around so she was in the trunk.  It COMPLETELY blows the timeline because the lividity shows conclusively that she had to be buried around midnight and that does not fit the timeline at all.  Adnan's presence was known after 7 or 8.  Remember too she was buried on her SIDE.

Look at the website and the car.   Did you lay down on your face and fold your legs up? I'm bigger with a smaller car so I have a hard time visualizing this.

Also, I BELIEVE that the lividity is consistent from her feet to her head, so legs folded up wouldn't be consistent with the lividity described.

The grass evidence I'm not so sure about.  I honestly cannot answer whether or not you would see green stains 6 months later.

(http://undisclosed-podcast.com/docs/5/hae-car.jpg)

This car was supposed to have been sitting here for over 6 weeks through multiple snow storms. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 10, 2015, 07:00:57 PM
First, I agree that the timeline is completely blown so we can take that off the table. That introduces reasonable doubt right there. While Adnan is a person of interest, I just don't  see enough to convict him.

What I thought however was that the livor mortis completely eliminated Hae from being inside the trunk but now I am not so sure.
This is what is on the autopsy report:
Lividity was present and fix.ed on the anterior surface of the body, except in areas exposed to pressure.
and further down:
Generalized skin slippage was noted and livor mortis was prominently seen on the anterior-upper chest and face .

I don't think we can say that there was livor mortis is the legs are based on that. I think she could have been chest down with legs folded back.

Edit: I am going to try it in my own trunk tomorrow with my roommate with a camera and the remote in my hand so I can get out of the trunk. This way we can see if it is doable or not. I will just blur out my license plate in case it needs to be used.  I want so U can easily escape if needed  ;D

Edit-2: Found a picture of a 2002 Nissan Sentra Trunk
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 10, 2015, 07:28:18 PM
First, I agree that the timeline is completely blown so we can take that off the table. That introduces reasonable doubt right there. While Adnan is a person of interest, I just don't  see enough to convict him.

What I thought however was that the livor mortis completely eliminated Hae from being inside the trunk but now I am not so sure.
This is what is on the autopsy report:
Lividity was present and fix.ed on the anterior surface of the body, except in areas exposed to pressure.
and further down:
Generalized skin slippage was noted and livor mortis was prominently seen on the anterior-upper chest and face .

I don't think we can say that there was livor mortis is the legs are based on that. I think she could have been chest down with legs folded back.

Edit: I am going to try it in my own trunk tomorrow with my roommate with a camera and the remote in my hand so I can get out of the trunk. This way we can see if it is doable or not. I will just blur out my license plate in case it needs to be used.  I want so U can easily escape if needed  ;D

LOL.  I would be willing to see this.  I'm reading it differently than you.  I will admit that it is ambiguous, but I would think that a careful autopsy would point out those locations where lividity did NOT exist.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 10, 2015, 07:40:08 PM
LOL.  I would be willing to see this.  I'm reading it differently than you.  I will admit that it is ambiguous, but I would think that a careful autopsy would point out those locations where lividity did NOT exist.

It many not matter to anybody else but Adnan did not get the death penalty* so I personally would like to be as sure as possible that he is innocent.  I actually wrote to the Undisclosed Podcast this:
I own a 2001 Ford Mustang and the trunk size appears to be similar. I laid a blanket out and I am basically able to fit into the trunk if I fold up my legs. Is there any information if her legs showing lividity?
And got this as a response:
None on her legs -- she was laid out flat somewhere, slightly inclined. Also her trunk had lots of stuff in it already.

I think an experiment might be good with the stuff I keep in the trunk initially at least

*If the death penalty is ever taken off the table or jury does not give death, that penalty is permanently off the table for that case.

edit: I forgot to add however that the prosecution side did a horrible job in just so many ways and one of those includes just a few black and white photos of her actual body.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on June 10, 2015, 10:33:29 PM
Sounds like a whole lot of authoritative declarations based on assumptions...

(what type of grass? some grass grows well in the shade. Was the car in a position where some sunlight could reach under the car? Why couldn't Hae's body have been prone, but with the legs folded up or twisted? This would still result in frontal lividity...)

yesyes, I'm still finding the time to listen to some episodes. Waiting till I can give it full attention, hopefully soon. :)

Think of yourself in the trunk . . . .I am using my 2001 Mustang trunk to get a rough picture. I am a bit larger than she is but I am not a big person. I always have stuff in there (as she did) as well but will pretend it is not there. I could easily fold me legs over my body if I was on my back but laying on my stomach, tucking legs under me just seems really strange. Also, when the car moves, I think the tendancy would be to fall onto the side.
I would argue that while being on her back would be possible, pretzeled on one side is by far the most likely situation.   

This is kind of what I'm getting at with my lazy-pre-listening conjecture... we can come up with a whole bunch of "maybe this happened" scenarios, but it's not exactly hard evidence.

If they're saying there was frontal lividity from head to toe, then I see how "knotted up in a trunk for a long time" doesn't seem likely, but all that proves is that she wasn't knotted up for a long time after death... anyway, to prevent pants/belgs' heads from exploding I promise to not post here again until I've listened (but please suggest a particularly strong episode, as I doubt I'll want to listen to the whole series).

DI be all like:

(http://i.imgur.com/YAUQKtO.gif)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 10, 2015, 11:02:45 PM

None on her legs -- she was laid out flat somewhere, slightly inclined. Also her trunk had lots of stuff in it already.



Hmm, I'm trying to understand 'slightly inclined' and how they know that.

possibly with knees and legs elevated and head slightly lower?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Gerbig on June 10, 2015, 11:09:03 PM

DI be all like:

(http://i.imgur.com/YAUQKtO.gif)

Not only that.

DI be all like:
"Hey guys, TL;DR, but here is why you are wrong about it anyway."
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 10, 2015, 11:27:02 PM

None on her legs -- she was laid out flat somewhere, slightly inclined. Also her trunk had lots of stuff in it already.



Hmm, I'm trying to understand 'slightly inclined' and how they know that.

possibly with knees and legs elevated and head slightly lower?

That would explain why the  livor mortis was prominently seen on the anterior-upper chest and face.
Maybe you can find something I missed with the autopsy report, it is in their document section.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 11, 2015, 12:12:00 AM

None on her legs -- she was laid out flat somewhere, slightly inclined. Also her trunk had lots of stuff in it already.



Hmm, I'm trying to understand 'slightly inclined' and how they know that.

possibly with knees and legs elevated and head slightly lower?

That would explain why the  livor mortis was prominently seen on the anterior-upper chest and face.
Maybe you can find something I missed with the autopsy report, it is in their document section.

Read it through.  Assuming that's true, I would think that you would have to have evidence of her laying on something in the trunk to have that sort of slant, cause in that area, there aren't hills so the car parked on a hill shouldn't cause that.  I think if she WAS on a slant it also makes it very unlikely that she was in the trunk for that time period.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 11, 2015, 01:21:52 AM

None on her legs -- she was laid out flat somewhere, slightly inclined. Also her trunk had lots of stuff in it already.



Hmm, I'm trying to understand 'slightly inclined' and how they know that.

possibly with knees and legs elevated and head slightly lower?

That would explain why the  livor mortis was prominently seen on the anterior-upper chest and face.
Maybe you can find something I missed with the autopsy report, it is in their document section.

Read it through.  Assuming that's true, I would think that you would have to have evidence of her laying on something in the trunk to have that sort of slant, cause in that area, there aren't hills so the car parked on a hill shouldn't cause that.  I think if she WAS on a slant it also makes it very unlikely that she was in the trunk for that time period.

I was in Washington DC and drove to Dulles and there where hills driving that way?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on June 11, 2015, 06:31:16 AM
Sounds like a whole lot of authoritative declarations based on assumptions...

(what type of grass? some grass grows well in the shade.
Really? What kind of grass grows well stuck to the wheel well again?

Quote
Was the car in a position where some sunlight could reach under the car?
Where grass stuck to the wheel well could photosynthesize?

Quote
Why couldn't Hae's body have been prone, but with the legs folded up or twisted? This would still result in frontal lividity...)
Hae was found in the grave lying on her right side. In order for livor mortis to kick in frontally, she would have had to have been placed face-down in the car for 10-12 hours. According to the prosecution she was murdered some time before 2:36 and buried some time around 7 (although Jay has recently amended his statement *again*, now saying that they did their thing after midnight, which, surprise, doesn't corroborate with the other evidence the prosecution has laid out). If she was found on her side and had frontal livor mortis, she was almost certainly not buried 5 hours after she was murdered.

I'm not saying that you have to read/consume every last bit of the evidence put out but by pointedly refusing to do so at *all* again and again, you're beginning to look very ignorant.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 11, 2015, 04:38:07 PM
That is going to be a strange question. . . . .My next door neighbor has a Nissan Sentra
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 11, 2015, 07:51:19 PM
Good lord, I hope y'all had fun with your little dogpile.

I chose the most recent episode.

1. Fact: Jay didn't describe where the car was located in the tapes.

Assumption: The conversation took place in the pre interview.

Conjecture: Possibilities include Jay knowing how to get there, but not knowing the streetnames; Jay giving a specific location in the preinterview; Jay not knowing the location.

2. Fact: Two locations for the car were noted; one of them is consistent with Jay's original account of the car being "on Edmundsen," but most of the documents show the location as a few blocks away.

Conjecture: so Jay knew something about the location of the car? The two locations are very close to each other; this could have been a typo, an incorrect description of the location, possibilities are pretty much endless.

3. Fact: In the report about Jenn's interview, a note of "600 Edgewood" was found. Jenn apparently didn't say anything about the car's location in the interview.

Conjecture: Possibilities include Jenn saying something about the car's location outside of the recorded interview, or the cops making a note of the car's location in an illogical place.

4. Cops didn't question neighbors about the car's location. That's stupid.

5. The car's photo. I can't see any grass in a wheelwell, at least nothing I can say for certain is grass, BUT, I do agree that it doesn't appear to have been parked at that location for 6 weeks, it looks like it had been parked in the space right next to it--in fact, in the space that the car's left wheels are on top of. The adjacent area that appears to have been parked upon for sometime could not have been occupied by another car with Hae's car in its current position.

It appears that Hae's car has been recently moved there. It's possible that the car was moved, but then replaced when the cops realized they forgot to take the pictures, it's possible that Hae's car was recently parked there from another location altogether. According to the show hosts, the cops say that the photo is before the car was moved... but that's what I would say, too, if I forgot to take the picture before moving evidence.

Not talked about: did anybody notice that the photo of the car does not match the illustration of the scene? In the illustration, Hae's car has a car on either side, and in the illustration, there are not 3 cars in the background parked in a perpendicular row in the illustration. The photo and illustration do not match.

6. On the car's outer appearance: impossible for any of us to guess if the car had been subjected to the elements. It's possible that the ice/rain gave the car a clean appearance, it's possible that the car was housed somewhere. There's not enough here to even guess about.

7. Fact: Jay provided no information about the crime "that Adnan told him" that could have been learned by looking in through the windows of the car, and provided no information about the burial site that couldn't have come from news images or provided to him by the cops (what Hae was wearing).

8. Fact: Jay (in the second interview) corrected things he got wrong in the first interview, but did not add wholly new details. Example: in the first interview, Jay mentions Adnan removing Hae's purse and wallet from Hae's car. After that time, cops found the purse (sans wallet) in the back seat out of view; in the second interview, Jay makes no mention of it.

Conjecture: Jay could have made it up completely; he could have been trying to tell the truth, but falsely remembered Adnan removing both and not just the wallet.

Fact: The jacket-- Jay describes finding the windbreaker, and says it was either thrown into the woods, or buried with her. Cops find the jacket in the trunk. The story changes to "a random jacket" in the second interview.

Conjecture: Jay could have made it up completely; he could have falsely remembered what they did with the jacket after picking it up off the ground. It seems likely the story between interviews changed at the behest of the police.

9. Fact: Jay said that he was told by Adnan that the windshield wiper lever on the steering column was kicked by Hae during the murder.The windshield wiper lever (on the right) was not broken. The turn signal (on the left) was broken according to the recollection of Hae's brother.

Conjecture: the state tried to use this as evidence; doesn't seem like evidence of anything to me. It's possible that Hae kicked the signal lever while struggling, and that Adnan inaccurately called it the wiper lever. 

10: Fact: the lividity pattern shows that Hae was face-down for at least 8-12 hours before being buried.

Conjecture: this is completely damning of the state's timeline (that we all already agreed was bullshit).

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

Conclusions:

The show certainly affirmed that the case against Adnan was really weak, but I've been saying that from the get-go.

Hae had to be buried a minimum of 8 hrs after she was killed, which makes the earliest possible time of burial 11:30-midnightish. I disagree with the show hosts that Hae could not have been face down in the trunk, with her legs bent at the knees. The podcast notes that Jay commented this last December that the burial was actually closer to midnight. Somebody might have told him to say this, or he might have been describing his memory.

The police work was even more incompetent than I had realized.

So what do we know? The state didn't have a case, Jay's story is full of lies, and Adnan shouldn't have been convicted.

I can't believe asking y'all do to what I just did was such a big deal.....  ::)











Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 11, 2015, 08:07:31 PM
The Sentra trunk is small. I have not yet tried the experiment with my Mustang trunk but when I looked at again, it is daunting.
I don't think one's knees could fold enough to close the trunk without a lot of force.
I think that somebody trying to put a body in the trunk would just turn to the side to try to avoid that.
We then run into a new problem in either case. Livor Mortis and Rigor Mortis occur at approximately the same time.
Her knees would likely be locked in the Rigor position and if "Prezeled", would have been locked in that position.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 11, 2015, 08:08:30 PM
Well, the other thing that you missed from previous episodes is that Jay's story changed to match what the police thought they knew.

In interview one, he described locations where the police thought things happened.  He then in interview two described what police thought at that time, but again these things were wrong (most of this has to do with locations that match up with cell phone records)

The damning one that I hoped you had listened to was the one where Jay was being coached by the police (which was where this all started :)


Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 11, 2015, 08:10:52 PM
The Sentra trunk is small. I have not yet tried the experiment with my Mustang trunk but when I looked at again, it is daunting.
I don't think one's knees could fold enough to close the trunk without a lot of force.
I think that somebody trying to put a body in the trunk would just turn to the side to try to avoid that.
We then run into a new problem in either case. Livor Mortis and Rigor Mortis occur at approximately the same time.
Her knees would likely be locked in the Rigor position and if "Prezeled", would have been locked in that position.

Well, remember rigor goes away after a while, but that would even more totally blow the timeline out of the water.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 11, 2015, 08:11:46 PM
The Sentra trunk is small. I have not yet tried the experiment with my Mustang trunk but when I looked at again, it is daunting.
I don't think one's knees could fold enough to close the trunk without a lot of force.
I think that somebody trying to put a body in the trunk would just turn to the side to try to avoid that.
We then run into a new problem in either case. Livor Mortis and Rigor Mortis occur at approximately the same time.
Her knees would likely be locked in the Rigor position and if "Prezeled", would have been locked in that position.

Lifeless bodies are really really difficult to manipulate. If anybody is ever trying to make you go somewhere you want to go, just go limp. If you're more than a hundred pounds, they'll have a hell of a time putting you anywhere.

IF Hae was put in the trunk, I doubt the person putting her there gave much thought to her positioning... face down is a logical way for the body to end up, and it would be easier to fold the legs at the knees up or to the side than manipulate the whole body.

Rigor is easily broken when manipulating the body, especially if carried by the arms and legs.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 11, 2015, 08:13:33 PM
Well, the other thing that you missed from previous episodes is that Jay's story changed to match what the police thought they knew.

In interview one, he described locations where the police thought things happened.  He then in interview two described what police thought at that time, but again these things were wrong (most of this has to do with locations that match up with cell phone records)

The damning one that I hoped you had listened to was the one where Jay was being coached by the police (which was where this all started :)

Well I DID ask if there was a specific episode anybody recommended...  :P

Anyway, I've said all along Jay's story is full of holes and lies, and it certainly seems like the police primed everything possible to make the case flow as easy as possible.

The question that raises: were Jay's lies manipulated, or did the police give him everything? I find the former more likely.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Gerbig on June 11, 2015, 08:34:25 PM
Yay, DI has now entered the conversation.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 11, 2015, 09:20:08 PM
Experimenting with myself, the easier way to take up as little space as possible is in the fetal position. I don't think that maybe the knees were folded up can fit in the trunk but you still have an issue of stuff in there.

Taking the picture and blowing it up, there is something green on the tires and wheel wells. The picture is not really the high quality you get from modern digital cameras so hard to tell exactly what.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 11, 2015, 11:50:12 PM
Experimenting with myself, the easier way to take up as little space as possible is in the fetal position. I don't think that maybe the knees were folded up can fit in the trunk but you still have an issue of stuff in there.

Taking the picture and blowing it up, there is something green on the tires and wheel wells. The picture is not really the high quality you get from modern digital cameras so hard to tell exactly what.

Realistically, if I'm putting a body in a trunk (especially by myself), it's going in how it's going on. If the body ends up on its stomach, then you just cram all the limbs however you need to to make it fit.

Anecdote: I handle dead, mostly dead, and somewhat dead people pretty regularly, albeit with more respect than my previous comment...
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 12, 2015, 03:11:58 AM
Well, I am not so sure I want to take the risk of cramming myself in my trunk because I am 47 years old and do not want to hurt myself. I wish me had some pictures of the trunk when opened by the police to see how much space was left over after all of her stuff because it might make it virtually an impossibility.

I found some pictures of people being smuggled in trunks from news items but when I have looked up news articles, the trunks are usually the larger types. I did find a news article of a body found in the trunk of a car which is a similar car to mine. 

One issue is that I believe her body was listed as being 134 after having been partially decomposed. Weather was cool but doesn't that still mean that she likely weighted a fair amount more, wouldn't she have been more around the 150 lb range before death? Thought I remember reading somewhere that within a few days, a body loose 10% of its mass (but of course body changes are 8x slower when buried.)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 17, 2015, 01:52:19 PM
Listening to the latest Addendum, I kind of disagree with the hosts. . . . .A young black male is NOT going to use the term "Taupe" for pantyhose. It almost has to be something fed to him by the police. Might use "Light flesh tone" as a description.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 17, 2015, 03:01:47 PM
Listening to the latest Addendum, I kind of disagree with the hosts. . . . .A young black male is NOT going to use the term "Taupe" for pantyhose. It almost has to be something fed to him by the police. Might use "Light flesh tone" as a description.

 ::)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 17, 2015, 04:08:29 PM
Listening to the latest Addendum, I kind of disagree with the hosts. . . . .A young black male is NOT going to use the term "Taupe" for pantyhose. It almost has to be something fed to him by the police. Might use "Light flesh tone" as a description.

 ::)

Are you rolling you eyes at my comment or at the police?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 17, 2015, 04:23:27 PM
Listening to the latest Addendum, I kind of disagree with the hosts. . . . .A young black male is NOT going to use the term "Taupe" for pantyhose. It almost has to be something fed to him by the police. Might use "Light flesh tone" as a description.

 ::)

Are you rolling you eyes at my comment or at the police?

I eyerolled you for being so confident in your knowledge of some individual's vocabulary that hearing a word you wouldn't expect him to use means that it "almost had to be" given to him by police.

I repeat:  ::)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 17, 2015, 04:34:06 PM
Listening to the latest Addendum, I kind of disagree with the hosts. . . . .A young black male is NOT going to use the term "Taupe" for pantyhose. It almost has to be something fed to him by the police. Might use "Light flesh tone" as a description.

 ::)

Are you rolling you eyes at my comment or at the police?

I eyerolled you for being so confident in your knowledge of some individual's vocabulary that hearing a word you wouldn't expect him to use means that it "almost had to be" given to him by police.

I repeat:  ::)

You have already seemed to accept that large part of his stories were fed to him by the police. I just don't think "taupe" is a common vocabulary word.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 17, 2015, 04:38:58 PM
(click to show/hide)

You have already seemed to accept that large part of his stories were fed to him by the police. I just don't think "taupe" is a common vocabulary word.

I said that I believe most of Jay's stories were not truthful. Whether he made them up himself, or how much (if any) the police "helped" is unclear.

I'm poking at you for making a very large leap to reach your conclusion.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 17, 2015, 04:46:31 PM
I said that I believe most of Jay's stories were not truthful. Whether he made them up himself, or how much (if any) the police "helped" is unclear.

I'm poking at you for making a very large leap to reach your conclusion.

What I am arguing is that it is another issue which seems to make it much more likely his confession was coached.
By itself, it is minor. If his story fit the facts otherwise (or a close approximation) probably discard it.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 17, 2015, 04:56:09 PM
I said that I believe most of Jay's stories were not truthful. Whether he made them up himself, or how much (if any) the police "helped" is unclear.

I'm poking at you for making a very large leap to reach your conclusion.

What I am arguing is that it is another issue which seems to make it much more likely his confession was coached.
By itself, it is minor. If his story fit the facts otherwise (or a close approximation) probably discard it.

I'm unconvinced. You say it's "another issue," but none of the presented issues are actually evidence that it took place. It's like the tapping thing... it could be the police prompting him, or it could be a hundred other things. If you start with the conclusion that Jay's testimony was fed to him, then everything is going to seem like evidence that points that direction. If you start without any conclusion at all, you end up with a bunch of facts that aren't evidence of anything more than crappy police work.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 17, 2015, 04:57:50 PM
In case it got lost in my really long post: did anybody else notice that the detective's illustration of the car's location does not seem to match the photo of Hae's car?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 17, 2015, 05:04:58 PM
I'm unconvinced. You say it's "another issue," but none of the presented issues are actually evidence that it took place. It's like the tapping thing... it could be the police prompting him, or it could be a hundred other things. If you start with the conclusion that Jay's testimony was fed to him, then everything is going to seem like evidence that points that direction. If you start without any conclusion at all, you end up with a bunch of facts that aren't evidence of anything more than crappy police work.

You at least agree that the timeline described does not really work?
Jay had to get that timeline from somewhere. If he was involved, why didn't he correct the cops.

If you look at Rudy Guede first "confession", he claims that he was in the toilet while space aliens murdered Meredeth but the timeline at least works when compared to physical evidence.

I would expect Jay to minimize his own role but I would expect a timeline that mostly works works with the physical evidence if he was involved.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 17, 2015, 05:18:27 PM
I'm unconvinced. You say it's "another issue," but none of the presented issues are actually evidence that it took place. It's like the tapping thing... it could be the police prompting him, or it could be a hundred other things. If you start with the conclusion that Jay's testimony was fed to him, then everything is going to seem like evidence that points that direction. If you start without any conclusion at all, you end up with a bunch of facts that aren't evidence of anything more than crappy police work.

You at least agree that the timeline described does not really work?

Oh yeah, the timeline (and pretty much all of the state's case) is bollucks.

Quote
Jay had to get that timeline from somewhere. If he was involved, why didn't he correct the cops.

He either made it up, was given it by the police, or some combination thereof.

I personally suspect the latter: I think Jay invented a story to minimize his own involvement, and the police massaged that story into what they felt was the most winnable case instead of seeking the truth, as they should have done. My non-evidence-supported theory is that Jay was involved in the murder itself... and the police may have known or suspected this, opting to offer Jay a way to get off scot-free if he threw Adnan under the bus.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 17, 2015, 07:47:14 PM
I find it highly unlikely that a person would use the term 'taupe' also, but I believe that the podcast hosts also don't believe it.

I don't think it's relevant either other than to support the idea that his story about specifics was fed to him by police.  I WILL give him the benefit of the doubt.  It very well could be that he was not a knowing participant in this.  There are hundreds of stories out there where people confessed to things they didn't do using knowledge given to them by police.

Additionally, DI is forgetting that the same two cops who were the 'lead detectives' in this case were proven to have falsified evidence and to have fed information to witnesses in later cases, those defendants are free now because of it.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 17, 2015, 07:56:25 PM
I find it highly unlikely that a person would use the term 'taupe' also, but I believe that the podcast hosts also don't believe it.

I don't think it's relevant either other than to support the idea that his story about specifics was fed to him by police.  I WILL give him the benefit of the doubt.  It very well could be that he was not a knowing participant in this.  There are hundreds of stories out there where people confessed to things they didn't do using knowledge given to them by police.

Additionally, DI is forgetting that the same two cops who were the 'lead detectives' in this case were proven to have falsified evidence and to have fed information to witnesses in later cases, those defendants are free now because of it.

Kind of the idea that you have to get at least some of the details right to believe you are probably involved (They need to be things that are both specific and something one could not easily get by random guessing either) . . . . .He seems to get almost nothing right. We are left with a timeline which simply does not work.

One trouble we have with the legal system is that it almost seems like the legal system does not care if you are innocent in many cases.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 17, 2015, 08:03:01 PM
I find it highly unlikely that a person would use the term 'taupe' also, but I believe that the podcast hosts also don't believe it.

How familiar are you with his vocabulary?

Quote
I don't think it's relevant either other than to support the idea that his story about specifics was fed to him by police.

I don't think it can be considered supporting of anything. We don't know his vocabulary.

Quote
It very well could be that he was not a knowing participant in this.  There are hundreds of stories out there where people confessed to things they didn't do using knowledge given to them by police.

Would you agree that your statement is just one of many (equally unsupported by evidence) possibilities?

Quote
Additionally, DI is forgetting that the same two cops who were the 'lead detectives' in this case were proven to have falsified evidence and to have fed information to witnesses in later cases, those defendants are free now because of it.

I did not forget--I'm maintaining that we still have no idea how much (if any) of Jay's story was made up by Jay, or given to him by police. That the cops had prior history lends plausibility to the "cops fed him all or part of his story" idea, but obviously it's not proof of anything.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 17, 2015, 08:08:48 PM
I don't consider "Taupe" a commonly used word in the English language
I walked my dog today and I asked a random black male if he knew what the color "taupe" and he though it was a shade of blue.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 17, 2015, 08:12:37 PM
I don't consider "Taupe" a commonly used word in the English language
I walked my dog today and I asked a random black male if he knew what the color "taupe" and he though it was a shade of blue.

Jay having the word "taupe" in his vocabulary is plausible.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 17, 2015, 08:26:31 PM
I don't consider "Taupe" a commonly used word in the English language
I walked my dog today and I asked a random black male if he knew what the color "taupe" and he though it was a shade of blue.

Jay having the word "taupe" in his vocabulary is plausible.

Say rather that it's possible but highly unlikely.  Especially since he didnt use that word in court to describe the same exact object.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on June 17, 2015, 08:47:38 PM
Yeah, I don't think taupe is the string that unravels the knot. The forensic evidence seems to be more than enough for that. My biggest takeaway from this episode is basically the thing I've realized but feared about the case since I came to realize that Adnan is innocent: thanks to the mishandling of the case and the fact that 16 years have elapsed since the events took place, there is simply no evidence pointing to anybody else. And without some kind of a smoking gun it is extremely unlikely that Adnan is freed.

Look at this from the standpoint of the current DAs of Baltimore County and Maryland. They have to figure that they probably got the right guy because their people - the cops and the former prosecutors - did the work. As long as they remain convinced that they jailed a guilty man, they are going to fight this case every step of the way. Now, Adnan does have a huge ace in the hole that is the tremendous amount of light and heat shed on this case thanks to the Serial podcast, but it's still a situation in which by far the easiest path would have been to figure out who the real killer was.

I'm convinced at this point that neither Adnan nor Jay had anything to do with this. I think Jay got coerced into manufacturing testimony in order to stay out of jail for something like possession with intent to deal, and perhaps at some point the police implicated his girlfriend as well. What that means, unfortunately, is that the most you're going to get out of him if he ever admitted to lying under oath is that the cops fed him answers. Sure, that's unconstitutional as hell but it still doesn't get you to the killer, and as long as there is no counter narrative beyond cops rushing to convict you're only going to need a judge or two to decide that a guy who is probably a killer shouldn't be let out because of what could be construed as a minor error in procedure.

The best case scenario I see is that Adnan gets the new trial after the state has exhausted its appeals and then is finally acquitted by a jury. If Jay flips, maybe the case never goes to trial. Either way Adnan is probably several years away from being released and we will probably never get an admission of wrongdoing from the prosecutors, much less punishment for ruining a young man's life.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 17, 2015, 08:48:56 PM
I don't consider "Taupe" a commonly used word in the English language
I walked my dog today and I asked a random black male if he knew what the color "taupe" and he though it was a shade of blue.

Jay having the word "taupe" in his vocabulary is plausible.

Say rather that it's possible but highly unlikely.  Especially since he didnt use that word in court to describe the same exact object.

It's not a common word, but people pick up uncommon words all the time.

We know Jay's story was manufactured, but we simply do not know how much (if any) of Jay's story was given to him by the cops.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 17, 2015, 08:56:49 PM
As I've said, there is no way Adnan should have been convicted.

The only evidence against Adnan is Jay, and we know Jay's story was totally made up.

Was Jay coerced into lying by the cops, who wanted to pin the murder on Adnan but had nothing? Possible. (why wouldn't Jay come clean about that now?)

Did Adnan and Jay kill and bury Hae, and Jay made up a story that would let himself avoid prison? Possible.

I find that more likely than J Slick's theory, as it explains Jay's behavior at that time and since, but now we're into the realm of pure conjecture.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 17, 2015, 08:58:39 PM
As I've said, there is no way Adnan should have been convicted.

The only evidence against Adnan is Jay, and we know Jay's story was totally made up.

Was Jay coerced into lying by the cops, who wanted to pin the murder on Adnan but had nothing? Possible. (why wouldn't Jay come clean about that now?)

Did Adnan and Jay kill and bury Hae, and Jay made up a story that would let himself avoid prison? Possible.

I find that more likely than J Slick's theory, as it explains Jay's behavior at that time and since, but now we're into the realm of pure conjecture.

I would expect some details seeming to match with the actual evidence while Jay's testimony matches oly what the cops wanted him to say.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 17, 2015, 09:02:12 PM
I would expect some details seeming to match with the actual evidence while Jay's testimony matches oly what the cops wanted him to say.

Are you sure you know what the cops wanted him to say? Wouldn't the cops have created a better story for him? (the answer is, of course, we don't know).

It's possible Jay made up a really crappy story.

It's possible that the cops tried to help Jay's story because it was so crappy.

It's possible that the cops made up a crappy story for Jay.

All of these things are possible, and none of them strike me as significantly more plausible than the others.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 17, 2015, 09:18:05 PM
I would expect some details seeming to match with the actual evidence while Jay's testimony matches oly what the cops wanted him to say.

Are you sure you know what the cops wanted him to say? Wouldn't the cops have created a better story for him? (the answer is, of course, we don't know).

It's possible Jay made up a really crappy story.

It's possible that the cops tried to help Jay's story because it was so crappy.

It's possible that the cops made up a crappy story for Jay.

All of these things are possible, and none of them strike me as significantly more plausible than the others.

It's possible the sun won't come up tomorrow, BUT, it's likely that Jay got his information from the cops because his story morphed to match the evidence as they found it.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 17, 2015, 09:38:40 PM
I would expect some details seeming to match with the actual evidence while Jay's testimony matches oly what the cops wanted him to say.

Are you sure you know what the cops wanted him to say? Wouldn't the cops have created a better story for him? (the answer is, of course, we don't know).

It's possible Jay made up a really crappy story.

It's possible that the cops tried to help Jay's story because it was so crappy.

It's possible that the cops made up a crappy story for Jay.

All of these things are possible, and none of them strike me as significantly more plausible than the others.

I have looked a fair number of cases and in the cases I am aware of,  confessions from people involved seem to include real details.  Often at least the timeline is right, for example. They might say that the sex was consensual, as another example. 

Confessions which are false tend to basically screw up everything. Time will be wrong, the rooms involved will be wrong, what the victim was wearing, etc.

It appears more like we have the second with regards to Jay's testimony. Seems like he only gets trivial details right and gets almost every important detail wrong. Time of burial wrong, what was claimed to have been tossed of hers, elements about how she was dressed. If you read the autopsy, it reals like there might have been sexual assault because she was partially disrobed.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 18, 2015, 02:13:04 AM
I would expect some details seeming to match with the actual evidence while Jay's testimony matches oly what the cops wanted him to say.

Are you sure you know what the cops wanted him to say? Wouldn't the cops have created a better story for him? (the answer is, of course, we don't know).

It's possible Jay made up a really crappy story.

It's possible that the cops tried to help Jay's story because it was so crappy.

It's possible that the cops made up a crappy story for Jay.

All of these things are possible, and none of them strike me as significantly more plausible than the others.

It's possible the sun won't come up tomorrow, BUT, it's likely that Jay got his information from the cops because his story morphed to match the evidence as they found it.

Could that also not have been Jay changing his own story when he realized some of his lies were revealed?

Like:

Jay is involved in Hae's murder, decides to throw Adnan under the bus to avoid jail.
Jay completely makes up most of the details of that day in his statement to the police.
When elements of his story are revealed as false, he changes them, and the cops go along with it because they'd rather get a conviction of Adnan than nobody.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 18, 2015, 02:15:53 AM
I have looked a fair number of cases and in the cases I am aware of,  confessions from people involved seem to include real details.  Often at least the timeline is right, for example. They might say that the sex was consensual, as another example. 

Confessions which are false tend to basically screw up everything. Time will be wrong, the rooms involved will be wrong, what the victim was wearing, etc.

It appears more like we have the second with regards to Jay's testimony. Seems like he only gets trivial details right and gets almost every important detail wrong. Time of burial wrong, what was claimed to have been tossed of hers, elements about how she was dressed. If you read the autopsy, it reals like there might have been sexual assault because she was partially disrobed.

We know that Jay's story was manufactured. We do not know if it was manufactured solely by Jay, solely by somebody else, or if the police "massaged" Jay's story.

There are plausible reasons for all of those possibilities, and there is no evidence that one is more likely than the others.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on June 18, 2015, 02:36:29 AM
The evidence seems to point to the police providing Jay with information about the case that they then had him "provide" for them. There is essentially nothing about the case that Jay knows that the police at the time did not also know, no revelations, no nothing. Whether you feel like that means that it's just as plausible that Jay and Adnan did it themselves some, like, completely other way or something or hired a hitman or perhaps employed Bigfoot to carry out the murder is kind of besides the point. The evidence that we have available seems to indicate that the cops decided Adnan was the murderer and concocted a narrative around that decision.

Unfortunately they then tunnel-visioned so hard on that story that we *don't know* what happened. It's not that the evidence actually leads somewhere else, it's that *there isn't any real evidence besides the fact that the state's case against Adnan is nonsensical.* Sure, maybe Jay and Adnan actually did it. Maybe they had help from Osama bin Laden; after all, this was before 9/11 so it's possible and he is an Arab. Maybe Hae knew the real truth about jet fuel can't melt steel beams and the CIA had to shut her up. Out of the mouths of babes, man. Out of the mouths of babes. :( :( :(
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 18, 2015, 04:11:53 AM
I am wondering about these Baltimore County?? Police runs on Hae's license plate.  That seems odd to me that they would be run between the date of the disappearance and the date they found the car.  The police theory was that the car was parked where they found it since the murder, but that doesn't make sense when these police checks of her license plate came from a different jurisdiction.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 18, 2015, 06:27:52 AM
We know that Jay's story was manufactured. We do not know if it was manufactured solely by Jay, solely by somebody else, or if the police "massaged" Jay's story.

There are plausible reasons for all of those possibilities, and there is no evidence that one is more likely than the others.

The trouble is that I have not seen anything like you describe in cases I look at.  There are any number of iffy cases but none that I consider based on other evidence which has a confession which does not match the other evidence.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 18, 2015, 01:54:49 PM
The evidence seems to point to the police providing Jay with information about the case

What evidence? The tapping sopunds? "Taupe?" Or something else?

Quote
that they then had him "provide" for them. There is essentially nothing about the case that Jay knows that the police at the time did not also know, no revelations, no nothing. Whether you feel like that means that it's just as plausible that Jay and Adnan did it themselves some, like, completely other way or something or hired a hitman or perhaps employed Bigfoot to carry out the murder is kind of besides the point. The evidence that we have available seems to indicate that the cops decided Adnan was the murderer and concocted a narrative around that decision.

Is this not just as plausible:

Jay wants to cover up his own involvement, so he concocts a narrative in his effort to throw Adnan under the bus. The narrative is horrible because Jay is bad at this. The police recognize that it's bullshit, but only care about getting the conviction, so they massage his story just enough to work in the courtroom.

^^that seems much more likely (to me) than the police having no case, so they concoct a hare-brained scheme to pick up a drug dealer off the street, (despite way too many people who would be aware of the conspiracy, if the police already had the car and such), and tell him to go along with this story about helping one of his customers murder somebody or else he goes to jail. Granted, that version would work way better in cinematic form.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 18, 2015, 02:28:10 PM
Except that's not what happened.  Jay completely avoided the cops and he didn't talk until they promised to get rid of another charge.  He THEN didn't say anything that the cops didn't already know and he THEN said things that the cops knew but we're wrong about.  The cell tower evidence proves this pretty conclusively.  He first said he was one place when the police cell tower evidence said one thing but then said a completely different place when the evidence pointed there.   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 18, 2015, 02:31:56 PM
Except that's not what happened.  Jay completely avoided the cops and he didn't talk until they promised to get rid of another charge.  He THEN didn't say anything that the cops didn't already know and he THEN said things that the cops knew but we're wrong about.  The cell tower evidence proves this pretty conclusively.  He first said he was one place when the police cell tower evidence said one thing but then said a completely different place when the evidence pointed there.   

Like I said, he might have been really bad at making up his story. Is that not possible?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 18, 2015, 05:46:44 PM
There was posted a cleaned up audio of the medical examiners interview.
It is only about twenty minutes but is another good to listen to.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 18, 2015, 06:08:55 PM
Like I said, he might have been really bad at making up his story. Is that not possible?

Possible, maybe but highly improbable.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 18, 2015, 06:30:55 PM
Yea but he's bad in PRECISELY such a way that it matches the police incorrect evidence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on June 18, 2015, 06:53:49 PM
Yea but he's bad in PRECISELY such a way that it matches the police incorrect evidence.
That can be easily explained if Bigfoot was involved. Bigfoot is really good at masking evidence and making it look exactly like what the cops already told him.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 18, 2015, 08:22:08 PM
Yea but he's bad in PRECISELY such a way that it matches the police incorrect evidence.
That can be easily explained if Bigfoot was involved. Bigfoot is really good at masking evidence and making it look exactly like what the cops already told him.

Do not laugh too much because I am arguing with someone who blames a serial killer named Edward Edwards for every high profile murder around the country for the last forty years.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 19, 2015, 12:30:43 AM
Yea but he's bad in PRECISELY such a way that it matches the police incorrect evidence.

Would you elaborate plz?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 20, 2015, 02:28:34 AM
Guys if you spent time on the Serial subreddit like I have, you would be THRILLED to find someone like DrunkenIdaho to argue with.  He might be wrong in his overall conclusion, but he is 100% logical and coherent getting there. What I mean to say is that you shouldn't be getting frustrated with him--TRUST ME you don't even know what that word means until you've spent time arguing with the 1/99 (Jan 1999) Truthers on Reddit. The only thing I would say to DI is this: if the possibility you think is most likely were true, wouldn't there be additionally evidence which would tie Adnan or Jay to the crime? While the investigation was lackluster, what little resources the police/prosecutors did spend were all done in effort to uncover inculpating evidence either implicating Adnan, or corroborating Jay.  All they came up with was Jay's testimony and Jenn's testimony.  Why?

Anyways, I wanted to add one other thing that the lividity evidence reveals to us which is actually new and I didn't see anyone mention.  In addition to showing Jay's testimony to be false (as if we didn't have enough already) and that the 7:00 Leakin Park pings aren't relevant, it gives us something which is both important as well as new. It proves that Jenn's testimony isn't accurate either. If Jay didn't help bury Hae at 7pm, then Jenn certainly didn't learn about the burial and help Jay dispose of evidence from 8-9pm either. Yet she still told the police this--why?

Personally, I think that all of the police coaching and directing of witness testimony does not necesarily mean the detectives were acting in bad faith.  On the contrary, I think they believed they were getting the bad guy the whole time.  What we see as feeding information and coaching witnesses, they likely saw as using tough methods to get an uncooperative witness to finally "tell the truth."  The fact that "the truth" keeps ending up being whatever their most current idea theory of the case is--well that just proves that their cop intuition is really good!  Once the witness knows that you know what really happened, they eventually confess. 

You just gotta yell at them, maybe something like "Look kid.  We know Adnan killed that girl. And we know you helped him!  Stop lying to us you piece of sh*t! Look at these photos, LOOK. We know you and him did this!  If you don't stop this I-don't-know bullsjit and start telling us the TRUTH, then lemme tell yA, getting in trouble for pot is gonna be the LEAST of your concerns.  If you keep lying to us saying you had nothing to do with it, then we are gonna have to just charge you with the murder. Now let's start from the top.  Why did you have Adnans car that day?"

If you haven't listened to it yet, you should really check out the This American Life episode called "Confessions."  It's the first story after the short prologue piece with the priest.  The piece involves Jim Tranum, who was the expert SK interviews during episode 4: inconsistencies.  It's the story of the time Tranum unknowingly and unintentionally elicited a false confession.  VERY interesting, and can totally show how there doesn't need to be malicious intent or conspiracy here. 

To paraphrase Hanlon: Do not assignmalice to what can be adequately explained as incompetence. 

http://audio.thisamericanlife.org/jomamashouse/ismymamashouse/507.mp3

This post is running long, so I'll save my theory about Jay for some other time.  I'll just say that I don't believe Jay was involved on the day of the murder.  However I do think he was, in a very interesting and unlikely way, connected.  That is to say, I done think Jay made up his story whole cloth with the detectives. I think he had thought up parts of it already, several weeks before.  It starts with the how that ignition collar in Hae's car was missing.....
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 20, 2015, 06:47:09 AM
Yea but he's bad in PRECISELY such a way that it matches the police incorrect evidence.

Would you elaborate plz?


The entire not-her-real-name-Cathy's apartment thing is the best example of this.  In Jay's first taped interview, he doesn't mention Cathy or going to her apartment at all. In between the first and second interview, the detectives get hold of the cell phone records.  On one of the maps in the police files, there is a map of the area with all of the cell towers marked.  However, one of the cell towers  has been misplaced.  The actual tower exists on a street of the same name except it's a "streetname road" instead of "streetname avenue" -- understandable error. This misplaced tower on the map is near only one place of interest (various ppl's houses are shown on the map, but only one is near the misplaced tower)--and that is Cathy's apartment. 

The cell phone records ping this tower at three different times that day.  So what happens during the 2nd interview when Jay is confronted with the cell records?  Now he changes his story so that far from not mentioning Cathy, he now says he actually went to cathy's THREE TIMES that day.  Each visit just happens to correspond with when the cell tower pings the tower by her house.  Err,.. Except the tower isn't by her house.  In fact, there is only one place that exists which suggests that pings on that tower would be consistent with Cathys house:  the map the police have where they filled in the cell tower locations themselves. 

Of course we now know that this trip to Cathys almost certainly didn't happen on the 13th at all, but rather on the 23rd.  But that's a diff story. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 20, 2015, 09:14:18 AM
This post is running long, so I'll save my theory about Jay for some other time.  I'll just say that I don't believe Jay was involved on the day of the murder.  However I do think he was, in a very interesting and unlikely way, connected.  That is to say, I done think Jay made up his story whole cloth with the detectives. I think he had thought up parts of it already, several weeks before.  It starts with the how that ignition collar in Hae's car was missing.....

Of note, I think a 1999 Nissan Sentra still used a regular key although there was a fob to open the doors.
I tried to look up to see if there is a special key for that year of Sentra but it looks like Nissan went to a chip imbedded key in 2000.
Seems a little strange that he would have tried to hotwire a friend's (or even an acquaintances) car however.

I have to be honest, I don't think Adnan is guilty but my certainty of innocence is not at the Norfolk Four level, for example. Not at the Russ Faria level either.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 20, 2015, 10:53:35 AM
(click to show/hide)

Thanks for agreeable disagreement!  :laugh:

It's not so much that I'm convinced Adnan is guilty, it's that I can't figure out why some people seem 100% convinced that he's innocent. The possibilities where Adnan is involved the murder seem just as plausible (and in my opinion are more so) than the theories where he isn't.

I agree (as been established) that there's really no evidence against Adnan, and I think he shouldn't have been convicted. There's also no evidence that clears Adnan, and I don't think he should be ruled out as a suspect.

Yea but he's bad in PRECISELY such a way that it matches the police incorrect evidence.

Would you elaborate plz?


The entire not-her-real-name-Cathy's apartment thing is the best example of this.  In Jay's first taped interview, he doesn't mention Cathy or going to her apartment at all. In between the first and second interview, the detectives get hold of the cell phone records.  On one of the maps in the police files, there is a map of the area with all of the cell towers marked.  However, one of the cell towers  has been misplaced.  The actual tower exists on a street of the same name except it's a "streetname road" instead of "streetname avenue" -- understandable error. This misplaced tower on the map is near only one place of interest (various ppl's houses are shown on the map, but only one is near the misplaced tower)--and that is Cathy's apartment. 

The cell phone records ping this tower at three different times that day.  So what happens during the 2nd interview when Jay is confronted with the cell records?  Now he changes his story so that far from not mentioning Cathy, he now says he actually went to cathy's THREE TIMES that day.  Each visit just happens to correspond with when the cell tower pings the tower by her house.  Err,.. Except the tower isn't by her house.  In fact, there is only one place that exists which suggests that pings on that tower would be consistent with Cathys house:  the map the police have where they filled in the cell tower locations themselves. 

Of course we now know that this trip to Cathys almost certainly didn't happen on the 13th at all, but rather on the 23rd.  But that's a diff story. 

Thanks for the response!

This is precisely the type of example I was imagining, because it fits both the "Jay made up a really bad story, and he corrected as necessary to get the story into something the cops could present to the DA, with them turning a blind eye to the inconsistencies and lies" narrative, as well as the, "Jay had nothing to do with it and the cops blackmailed him into repeating their story so that they could convict Adnan whom they suspected but had no evidence against" narrative.

The former seems more likely to me, but we're left in the realm of conjecture.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 20, 2015, 08:43:03 PM

Seems a little strange that he would have tried to hotwire a friend's (or even an acquaintances) car however.


I didn't mean to suggest that I think Jay hotwired the car.  Rather, I think someone Jay knew did so. Then at some later point, he and Jay are together, and Jay is able to identify the car. I think this gave Jay the opportunity to examine the car up and down, and led him to correctly conclude that Hae was dead, having been murdered.

During this inspection he noticed the broken lever, and imagines Hae breaking it during a struggle.  Most interesting to me is the fact that Jay knew that one needed the key in order to get into the trunk.  That even if the car is hotwired, there is literally no way from inside the car to pop it open.  This is an obscure piece of information that I think one would only discover after an exhaustive search and resulting failure to get in there. 

If I may be allowed to go back to some resultant speculation for a moment, let's assume that the above scenario is true. Think of the consequences which Jay's inability to access that trunk might cause.  This girl you know has disappeared for a month, and no one knows where she is.  Suddenly you happen upon her CAR, and there is no sign of her anywhere. There is just one place you are unable to look: the dark mysterious trunk.  In that situation one could entertain the possibility Hae's body might even be in that trunk right then and there, pretzeled up.  The car wouldve stunk to high hell if this were the case of course, but my point is that someone's imagination would do the heavy lifting in this situation.

Now consider also how juicy of gossip/information this would be for Jay.  He literally has come upon some serious insider information on Hae's disappearance.  This is the point in which he began telling the handful of people about the crime. (Note I'm not including Jenn here.  As stated earlier I don't think her testimony is credible. Maybe she was one of these friends whom Jay told, but I don't buy that he told her Jan 13th). However each time Jay tells this juicy story, he would need to avoid mentoning his friend/relative who apparantly makes a habit of hotwiring cars.  As a result, he embellishes and places himself as a third party, a recipient of the inside details on the day the murder actually happened. 

Ok so back to non-speculation.  If we interpret the ignition collar removal to mean the car was hotwired, I find it extremely unlikely that this was the killer.  Why? Because the killer would almost certainly have the keys.  Why, if fearing for her life trying to escape an assailant, would Hae fling away/dispose of her car keys?  Those keys would be her lifeline in that situation.  So:

1)  Jay was keenly aware that without the actual physical car key, the trunk to Hae's car was literally inaccessible.  There is nothing in his narrative whatsoever which would suggest why he would know this.  Therefore his explicit knowledge suggests, to me, that in Jay's interaction with this car, neither he nor anyone he was with had actual access to the physical car key.
2)  The killer, whether this be Adnan or whoever else, almost certainly had the car key.

and Thus 3) It seems unlikely that Jay was the killer or that Jay was with the killer.  His interaction with that car came at a later time, resulting in his knowledge of the car's location as well as the other stuff mentioned.

What follows after those 3 points is admittedly speculation built on that foundation--however as far as speculation goes, I think it predicts much more accurately Jay's later behavior. My problem with the Adnan is guilty and enlisted Jay to follow him around all day in a separate car possibility, is that nobody in any version of Jay's scenarios acts at all like a realistic normal human being would. 

I mean, who threatens someone they'll rat them for pot dealing if you don't help me with this murder?  Uhm inadequate ultimatum much?  And what exactly was Jay's purpose/assistance anyway?  Adnan supposedly calls for Jay to "come pick him up" --but when Jay arrives, Adnan of course already has Hae's car.  In fact, Jays only role it seems was to drive around behind Adnan in a separate car all day to witness crimes which he could later testify to.  Why?  Why would Adnan involve Jay at all?  Who behaves this way in real life?

And seriously, who gets told that someone they know was just murdered and responds with "For reals? Awww, Snap!" 

The whole thing top to bottom just seems so very disconnected from reality.  If there was any kind of physical evidence whatsoever to support it, I might be able to swallow it.  But in addition to the story seeming so wildly unrealistic, there's also nothing physical connecting the crime to Adnan.  Which is exactly what one would find if the story was made up. 

So is it possible Adnan killed Hae, just like Jay said?  Sure, it's possible. But everything I have seen up until now continues to add more and more and more weight onto the other side of the scale. It's been a long time since anything has surfaced going the prosecutions way. 

It just seems like if he actually did it, all this wouldn't be so damn hard.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 20, 2015, 09:00:05 PM
See what I mean?

For Adnan and Jay to have not been involved in the murder results in a MUCH more complex narrative, AND forces there to be a somewhat large conspiracy within the police department.

Compare with my speculation:

Jay and Adnan killed Hae. Jay threw Adnan under the bus, figuring that Adnan wouldn't cop to his own involvement. Jay made up a really crappy story to avoid implicating himself in anything serious. The cops helped Jay make his narrative something the prosecution could present, ignoring all the inconsistencies and lies because actual police work isn't their cup of tea.

Done.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 20, 2015, 09:10:47 PM
This is a remarkable story about a remarkable case.  I don't think that Occam's razor holds as much water in this situation. 

And again, why is there a total and complete void of any physical evidence? If what you propose were true, why is it that every new piece of information goes the other way?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 20, 2015, 09:11:56 PM
The possibilities where Adnan is involved the murder seem just as plausible (and in my opinion are more so) than the theories where he isn't.

I agree (as been established) that there's really no evidence against Adnan, and I think he shouldn't have been convicted. There's also no evidence that clears Adnan, and I don't think he should be ruled out as a suspec

I don't see how, given a clean slate where we go back to the original pool of suspects, that you think Adnan is the most likely possibility?  Don I think would the highest probability target. 

He's the older, current boyfriend.  She spent the previous night at his house, and had plans to spend the next night at his house too.  Right before Hae disapears, according to two of her friends (Becky and Stephanie), during lunch she was not talkative, and when pressed said "she was just thinking about Don."  Then immediately after school she tells her friends that something came up, and that she had to leave right away.  She's never seen alive again.'

The detective that evening calls both the current boyfriend Don and the ex-boyfriend Adnan.  He is unable to get in touch with Don, however, who doesn't call the detective back until 1:30 AM that night.  Being that he was supposed to be seeing Hae that night after her work shift, why the delay?  He says he was working, but it wasn't at his normal store. Instead he says he was filing in at a different LensCrafters, one which his mother is the manager of.  Even still, when his work records are subpoena'd eight months later, they don't list that he was working that day.  The prosecutor has to make a special call to LensCrafters (this is right before he is going to testify in the trial) and the corrected work records are procured.

I'm not saying all this to say Im convinced Don did it. I just mean to say that if we are going back to the original suspect pool, I don't see why the ex-boyfriend who seems to have moved on and is regularly seeing/dating someone else, would be the most likely suspect?  Personally, I would put him, at best, as the 2nd most likely suspect.   
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 20, 2015, 09:17:30 PM
See what I mean?

For Adnan and Jay to have not been involved in the murder results in a MUCH more complex narrative, AND forces there to be a somewhat large conspiracy within the police department.


?  Come on man.  I spent literally three paragraphs dispelling the notion that there need be a conspiracy.  If you think that such an outcome "forces" this, then please go back and re-read what I wrote.  To me, the idea of a police conspiracy is EXTREMEly farfetched and unlikely, and you bringing it up like that feels like a straw man.

And additionally, you fail to respond to anything in the second half of what I wrote.  Everything about Adnan and Jay, working together, to kill Hae is implausible.  Jay's involvement period is implausible.  Why would he even be there? To me, his enlistment to help Adnan kill Hae is the most absurd part of the entire story. 

You haven't responded to any of that except to say "Well obviously Jays story is false.  But in the end, it's most likely the one that's true."
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on June 20, 2015, 10:23:26 PM
Yeah, I don't think anybody in here was arguing for a widespread conspiracy in the police department. What I think what happened is that the cops got tunnel visioned on a guy who they thought was the killer and then leaned on a guy they figured ought to have knowledge of the murder and made him "confess". That's technically a conspiracy, I guess, but it's a conspiracy of 2 cops doing something that they apparently did on a fairly regular basis and might not even have figured it was "wrong" in the sense of being really unethical to their POV. The prosecutor doesn't necessarily see how the sausage is made, just the sausage itself. The case is now being scrutinized far more closely than these cases tend to be, so things that seem fairly obvious at 3rd or 4th glance seem, well, obvious now. I mean, I do think the prosecutor behaved in ways in this case that make me think he had an inkling there was wrongdoing he attempted to suppress, but even that was likely as not not verbalized between him and the cops; he's as interested in protecting his "wins" as they are, and the last thing he wants to do as a DA is appear to sell his guys out.

I think that the most elegant of all the story versions is that one, that the cops did what they did in other cases, with the primary difference here being that they did it incorrectly (which even at that isn't really a huge difference inasmuch as another verdict they helped acquire got vacated).
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on June 20, 2015, 11:03:55 PM
See what I mean?

For Adnan and Jay to have not been involved in the murder results in a MUCH more complex narrative, AND forces there to be a somewhat large conspiracy within the police department.


?  Come on man.  I spent literally three paragraphs dispelling the notion that there need be a conspiracy.  If you think that such an outcome "forces" this, then please go back and re-read what I wrote.  To me, the idea of a police conspiracy is EXTREMEly farfetched and unlikely, and you bringing it up like that feels like a straw man.

For neither Jay nor Adnan to be involved with Hae's murder would take a huge conspiracy. That would mean that so much evidence was not just mishandled, but misrepresented. (more people than just the detectives are involved in cataloguing evidence) That would mean also mean that every word of Jay's story was created by the police. (there are people recording that interview, around beforehand, and superiors keeping tabs on what's going on).

This is a big conspiracy, and I don't buy it. It's also not impossible, I understand.

Quote
And additionally, you fail to respond to anything in the second half of what I wrote.
 

Pointing out that it took you three paragraphs was my response, but I apologize, because I see that I came off as dismissive.

Quote
Everything about Adnan and Jay, working together, to kill Hae is implausible.  Jay's involvement period is implausible.  Why would he even be there? To me, his enlistment to help Adnan kill Hae is the most absurd part of the entire story.
 

1. Jay doesn't believe Adnan at first, goes in on a lark, ends up in over his head before he can back out.
2. Jay believes Adnan, thinks it'll be good for his "badboy" rep, goes to help, ends up in over his head before he can back out.
3. (what I think happened) Jay actually helps Adnan kill Hae. Throws Adnan under the bus, rightly believing that Adnan will never come clean.

There. THREE plausible alternatives. You don't have to think they're likely, but they are plausible.

Quote
You haven't responded to any of that except to say "Well obviously Jays story is false.  But in the end, it's most likely the one that's true."

There have been so many comments mentioning the falsity of Jay's story as if that means Adnan couldn't have done it. I'm saying I agree little to none of that story was true, but it does not free Adnan from suspicion.

I don't see how, given a clean slate where we go back to the original pool of suspects, that you think Adnan is the most likely possibility?  Don I think would the highest probability target. 

He's the older, current boyfriend.  She spent the previous night at his house, and had plans to spend the next night at his house too.  Right before Hae disapears, according to two of her friends (Becky and Stephanie), during lunch she was not talkative, and when pressed said "she was just thinking about Don."  Then immediately after school she tells her friends that something came up, and that she had to leave right away.  She's never seen alive again.'

That's right after Adnan had been bugging her to give him a ride, right...?  ;)

Quote
The detective that evening calls both the current boyfriend Don and the ex-boyfriend Adnan.  He is unable to get in touch with Don, however, who doesn't call the detective back until 1:30 AM that night.  Being that he was supposed to be seeing Hae that night after her work shift, why the delay?  He says he was working, but it wasn't at his normal store. Instead he says he was filing in at a different LensCrafters, one which his mother is the manager of.  Even still, when his work records are subpoena'd eight months later, they don't list that he was working that day.  The prosecutor has to make a special call to LensCrafters (this is right before he is going to testify in the trial) and the corrected work records are procured.

I'm not saying all this to say Im convinced Don did it. I just mean to say that if we are going back to the original suspect pool, I don't see why the ex-boyfriend who seems to have moved on and is regularly seeing/dating someone else, would be the most likely suspect?  Personally, I would put him, at best, as the 2nd most likely suspect.   

Definitely some new information to me in there, I only recalled Serial saying that Don's alibi was solid. Was that in this other podcast?

And to be clear: I'm not advocating the position that Adnan is guilty so much as opposing the folks who are sure he's innocent.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 21, 2015, 02:14:13 AM
For neither Jay nor Adnan to be involved with Hae's murder would take a huge conspiracy. That would mean that so much evidence was not just mishandled, but misrepresented. (more people than just the detectives are involved in cataloguing evidence) That would mean also mean that every word of Jay's story was created by the police. (there are people recording that interview, around beforehand, and superiors keeping tabs on what's going on).

This is a big conspiracy, and I don't buy it. It's also not impossible, I understand.

There are a number of cases of wrongful conviction where there is either something akin to widespread conspiracy or incompetence across a great many levels. I do not see why this case would be any different.

I can recommend a number - David Camm, Russ Faria, Ryan Ferguson, Amanda Knox / Raffaele Sollecito, West Memphis Three, and Norfolk Four.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 21, 2015, 02:46:29 AM
I didn't mean to suggest that I think Jay hotwired the car.  Rather, I think someone Jay knew did so. Then at some later point, he and Jay are together, and Jay is able to identify the car. I think this gave Jay the opportunity to examine the car up and down, and led him to correctly conclude that Hae was dead, having been murdered.

During this inspection he noticed the broken lever, and imagines Hae breaking it during a struggle.  Most interesting to me is the fact that Jay knew that one needed the key in order to get into the trunk.  That even if the car is hotwired, there is literally no way from inside the car to pop it open.  This is an obscure piece of information that I think one would only discover after an exhaustive search and resulting failure to get in there. 

If I may be allowed to go back to some resultant speculation for a moment, let's assume that the above scenario is true. Think of the consequences which Jay's inability to access that trunk might cause.  This girl you know has disappeared for a month, and no one knows where she is.  Suddenly you happen upon her CAR, and there is no sign of her anywhere. There is just one place you are unable to look: the dark mysterious trunk.  In that situation one could entertain the possibility Hae's body might even be in that trunk right then and there, pretzeled up.  The car wouldve stunk to high hell if this were the case of course, but my point is that someone's imagination would do the heavy lifting in this situation.

Now consider also how juicy of gossip/information this would be for Jay.  He literally has come upon some serious insider information on Hae's disappearance.  This is the point in which he began telling the handful of people about the crime. (Note I'm not including Jenn here.  As stated earlier I don't think her testimony is credible. Maybe she was one of these friends whom Jay told, but I don't buy that he told her Jan 13th). However each time Jay tells this juicy story, he would need to avoid mentoning his friend/relative who apparantly makes a habit of hotwiring cars.  As a result, he embellishes and places himself as a third party, a recipient of the inside details on the day the murder actually happened. 

Ok so back to non-speculation.  If we interpret the ignition collar removal to mean the car was hotwired, I find it extremely unlikely that this was the killer.  Why? Because the killer would almost certainly have the keys.  Why, if fearing for her life trying to escape an assailant, would Hae fling away/dispose of her car keys?  Those keys would be her lifeline in that situation.  So:

1)  Jay was keenly aware that without the actual physical car key, the trunk to Hae's car was literally inaccessible.  There is nothing in his narrative whatsoever which would suggest why he would know this.  Therefore his explicit knowledge suggests, to me, that in Jay's interaction with this car, neither he nor anyone he was with had actual access to the physical car key.
2)  The killer, whether this be Adnan or whoever else, almost certainly had the car key.

and Thus 3) It seems unlikely that Jay was the killer or that Jay was with the killer.  His interaction with that car came at a later time, resulting in his knowledge of the car's location as well as the other stuff mentioned.

What follows after those 3 points is admittedly speculation built on that foundation--however as far as speculation goes, I think it predicts much more accurately Jay's later behavior. My problem with the Adnan is guilty and enlisted Jay to follow him around all day in a separate car possibility, is that nobody in any version of Jay's scenarios acts at all like a realistic normal human being would. 

I mean, who threatens someone they'll rat them for pot dealing if you don't help me with this murder?  Uhm inadequate ultimatum much?  And what exactly was Jay's purpose/assistance anyway?  Adnan supposedly calls for Jay to "come pick him up" --but when Jay arrives, Adnan of course already has Hae's car.  In fact, Jays only role it seems was to drive around behind Adnan in a separate car all day to witness crimes which he could later testify to.  Why?  Why would Adnan involve Jay at all?  Who behaves this way in real life?

And seriously, who gets told that someone they know was just murdered and responds with "For reals? Awww, Snap!" 

The whole thing top to bottom just seems so very disconnected from reality.  If there was any kind of physical evidence whatsoever to support it, I might be able to swallow it.  But in addition to the story seeming so wildly unrealistic, there's also nothing physical connecting the crime to Adnan.  Which is exactly what one would find if the story was made up. 

So is it possible Adnan killed Hae, just like Jay said?  Sure, it's possible. But everything I have seen up until now continues to add more and more and more weight onto the other side of the scale. It's been a long time since anything has surfaced going the prosecutions way. 

It just seems like if he actually did it, all this wouldn't be so damn hard.

There is a lot to answer here. . . . . I consider it just as likely that Jay found Hae's car, either through just blind luck or it was on one of his common routes. Whatever the case, the car does not appear to have been parked in the location it was found for any length of time. Even assuming that it was parked next to where it was photographed, it still shows really bad procedure by the police.

I know a car in a bad neighborhood of town can have its windows shattered within a few hours and everything stolen from the car. Having a car hotwired is not out of the question and almost surprised all four windows were not smashed in.  Only thing I can figure is that there was nothing worth obvious breaking a window and stealing.

Even if I was a pot dealer, I would likely rat you out in a moment if I found you murdered your ex-girl friend. Almost any police officer in the country would turn a blind eye and say "kid, just don't do it anymore."

There are however cases where are pure circumstantial which are solid. One that I would argue is the Laci Peterson murder case. The circumstantial evidence against her husband is pretty damning.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 21, 2015, 10:52:50 AM
Nothing that Jay said about the murder could not have been said by ANYONE who:

1) Had access to the evidence that the police ALREADY knew when they talked to him

and

2) Could have known by just walking by Hae's car parked somewhere.

He didn't have any specific knowledge of anything other than POSSIBLY where Hae's car was located.  I don't need any sort of conspiracy there.  Nor do I need to believe that the police were trying to FRAME someone.  The police absolutely thought that Adnan was guilty and then did what they could to make sure they could prove that in court, so they fudged a bit here and a bit there, mainly making sure that Jay's story matched the evidence.  There is absolutely no need for a conspiracy or any sort of elaborate story, NOR is there ANY need for Jay to have been involved with the murder at all.



Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 21, 2015, 10:59:06 AM
Belgarath:
Do you believe that a guilty person can be framed? Do the police have to believe that a suspect is innocent for it to be considered a frame?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on June 21, 2015, 11:52:10 AM
Belgarath:
Do you believe that a guilty person can be framed? Do the police have to believe that a suspect is innocent for it to be considered a frame?

I can't speak for Belly, but yes - I certainly think a guilty person can be framed.  And that is still a miscarriage of justice.  And no matter what, the police's job should be to get at the truth - NOT get a conviction (regardless if they honestly think someone is guilty).

Beyond that, I do not think this is what happened here.  I am pretty convinced that Adanan and Jay had nothing to do with the actual act of Hae's murder.  I think the police didn't even have the right day.

Furthermore Jay is probably guilty of a drug charge, and that is how they got him to testify.  He said nothing about the crime before his drug charge except "supposedly" to people who have said they are willing to lie for him.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 21, 2015, 11:59:34 AM
Belgarath:
Do you believe that a guilty person can be framed? Do the police have to believe that a suspect is innocent for it to be considered a frame?

I can't speak for Belly, but yes - I certainly think a guilty person can be framed.  And that is still a miscarriage of justice.  And no matter what, the police's job should be to get at the truth - NOT get a conviction (regardless if they honestly think someone is guilty).

Beyond that, I do not think this is what happened here.  I am pretty convinced that Adanan and Jay had nothing to do with the actual act of Hae's murder.  I think the police didn't even have the right day.

Furthermore Jay is probably guilty of a drug charge, and that is how they got him to testify.  He said nothing about the crime before his drug charge except "supposedly" to people who have said they are willing to lie for him.

We had a big argument on another forum where someone was trying to argue that one cannot frame somebody you think is guilty.

Conspiracy is another issue here though. . . .
I would argue that there was a conspiracy where a number of police officers involved "Made secret plans jointly to commit an unlawful or harmful act." Maybe not some grand conspiracy however.

I see the cops are likely knowing the evidence they are presented as being false.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 21, 2015, 12:00:37 PM
I believe that a guilty person can be framed, however i don't think that is what happened in this case.   What I think is that police NEVER intentionally go after someone they think is innocent.  I think they truly believed that Adnan did it. 

Other than that I pretty much agree with PANTS assessment.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 21, 2015, 02:28:36 PM
I believe that a guilty person can be framed, however i don't think that is what happened in this case.   What I think is that police NEVER intentionally go after someone they think is innocent. I think they truly believed that Adnan did it. 

While I think it is extremely rare, I think they sometimes will just go after the bad person who they don't think is actually guilty fo the crime which they are trying to him or her convicted of. I have looked at a lot of cases and there is a handful where you have to stop and wonder if anything but knowing malice could be the motivation.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on June 21, 2015, 03:17:38 PM
I'm not even sure they do that on purpose, they just go with the "where there's smoke, there's fire" notion and sometimes take it to embarrassingly bad conclusions.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 21, 2015, 05:12:42 PM
Could there be a singular case of some police department somewhere where they knowingly went after an innocent person?  Yes.  But that's as good as almost never. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 21, 2015, 05:32:07 PM
Could there be a singular case of some police department somewhere where they knowingly went after an innocent person?  Yes.  But that's as good as almost never. 

I think that there are some cases where at least individual police officers, prosecutors, or judges know that their defendants are innocent. Don't know if they actually talk about it with each other.

I think they may very well do it for political reasons. The judge and prosecutor with the West Memphis Three are good examples of this. I honestly think they did not care if the defendants were guilty or innocent but could use it to rise up the political ladder.

There may also be cases where investigators and prosecutors realize that they made mistakes but are unwilling to admit those mistakes and they are willing to admit that. Basically, they are protecting their reputation. This include the forensic expert with the Amanda Knox case and Detective Glenn Ford with the Norfolk Four (he also was a dirty cop.)

I honestly think that with the Norfolk Four and the West Memphis Three as well, the state did not want to admit their mistake because of the lawsuit it would open up and the millions it would cost the state.

Of course these can all be mixed together.   
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 21, 2015, 05:33:36 PM
I think that all the people involved in those cases likely thought they were guilty and were acting unethically in pursuit of their goals.  There is a subtle but important difference. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 21, 2015, 05:39:11 PM
I think that all the people involved in those cases likely thought they were guilty and were acting unethically in pursuit of their goals.  There is a subtle but important difference. 

This may see a strange question but look up the Iowa turret explosion on Wiki. . . . . Do you honestly believe that they really thought it was a bomb planted by a gay lover? Sometimes there is just ass covering in my opinion.

Edit: Providing a link
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Iowa_turret_explosion
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 23, 2015, 12:14:19 AM
Listening to "The Suspect" and while it is not so much argument for innocence, it seems to be about how badly the prosecution side hosed things up. Lots of information which could be exculpatory just "disappeared."
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 23, 2015, 03:38:09 AM


For neither Jay nor Adnan to be involved with Hae's murder would take a huge conspiracy. That would mean that so much evidence was not just mishandled, but misrepresented. (more people than just the detectives are involved in cataloguing evidence) That would mean also mean that every word of Jay's story was created by the police. (there are people recording that interview, around beforehand, and superiors keeping tabs on what's going on)



No man, it isn't.  Mishandled and misrepresented what evidence?  There was no evidence, nothing that was catalogued, that connected Adnan to the crime.  Literally NOTHING.  It was Jay's testimony.  That's it. 

Are you saying that you can't imagine two detectives, dead set SURE they know who committed the crime, interrogating and threatening Jay to "tell them the truth about how Adnan killed that girl" because they "know he killed that girl.  Now we know you had his car and cell phone that day?  You trying to tell us that you weren't connected?  You better start telling us the truth about what happened, or you are going to go away for a LONG time...."

This is how wrongful convictions happen.  No conspiracy involved or needed.  The police, when they get a target into interrogation, reject and reject and reject everything the person is telling them as bullshit and lies.  They threaten the person and continuously put on the pressure until the person eventually tells them what they want hear, "the truth" as they see it. 

The only way that this extremely common tactic results in a rightful conviction, is when the police actually DO happen to have the correct person in their crosshairs.  Which is, unfortunately, is quite often of the dice often.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 23, 2015, 03:53:15 AM
Listening to "The Suspect" and while it is not so much argument for innocence, it seems to be about how badly the prosecution side hosed things up. Lots of information which could be exculpatory just "disappeared."

While I was listening I couldn't help but start thinking of an interesting challenge to put to DI.

DI, please listen to the latest episode of Undisclosed, or possibly Episode 4: 28 days--listen at least until you are thoroughly convinced of the fact that the police had focused in on Adnan as the only suspect way way before they had even heard of the name Jay. Personally I think there is evidence that as early as Feb 4th, but certainly by Feb 11th. 

Once you feel like you can safely agree with me that the police had Adnan as their only suspect well before speaking to Jay, then I want to ask you this:

Do you think the fact that Jay cracks and implicated  Adnan on February 27th/28th (the interrogation started the 27th, but didn't get juicy until after midnight into the 28th) is just fortunate luck?  That they happened to guess correctly to begin with, and ended up with the right guy? 

This goes to the question earlier about whether you can frame a guilty person.  The answer is yes, you certainly can.  And it happens all the time.  It happened to an absurd degree in the OJ Simpson murder trial, and IMO it is the reason that fucker got acquitted.  The police don't play fair.  However, they do it thinking they are doing it to a guilty person.  They do it to make sure these guilty bastards don't wiggle out of punishment in the legal system.  They do it to take steps in order to help justice be served further down the line. 

Now this is of course horribly misguided, and is the primary source or wrongful convictions.  But it happens. These are people who think they are helping enable justice to be more effectively served. No consciously evil cabal or conspiracy required. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 23, 2015, 04:13:05 AM
I think that all the people involved in those cases likely thought they were guilty and were acting unethically in pursuit of their goals.  There is a subtle but important difference. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Exactly 

In my opinion, the only person who knew that the story was made up was Jay.  This is why the changes over the course of four interviews were so bumbling and often misdirected.  You listen to the recordings and Jay will often be at a loss as to where his story is supposed to go next. He starts in one direction, pauses and says "uh I'm sorry" and then changes what he's saying to say something else. 

It's like the absolute worst psychic cold reading of all time.

If it were truly a consciously created story made up whole cloth by the cops, they wouldn't have had so much trouble getting it hammered out. The final story Jay gave wouldn't just kinda sorta match the cell phone records in certain places but not others, it would have been pinpoint accurate and fit perfectly, with no huge gaping flaws like it does. 

At the very end of episode 6 of Serial Dynasty, the host does a great job giving an example of this. He gives a timeline theory of Jan 13th, except where Jay was the murderer.  This isn't what he thinks really happened, but rather he's showing how one can create a story that matches cell records.  It also fits those records beautifully at every single call throughout the day, time wise and location wise.  Wayy better than Jay's version.  Why?  Because it was made up whole-cloth, and not created as the result of a weird hot-and-cold psychic cold reading game over the course of four separate police interviews.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 23, 2015, 04:41:31 AM
I think that all the people involved in those cases likely thought they were guilty and were acting unethically in pursuit of their goals.  There is a subtle but important difference. 

This may see a strange question but look up the Iowa turret explosion on Wiki. . . . . Do you honestly believe that they really thought it was a bomb planted by a gay lover? Sometimes there is just ass covering in my opinion.

Edit: Providing a link
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Iowa_turret_explosion

MAN. That's a real trip of an article.  My father was in the Jag corp (navy lawyers) back in 89, next time I see him im going to ask about it. I found this part of the article particularly poignant to what we've been discussing:

Quote

n 25 May at Norfolk, NIS agents Goodman and Mike Dorsey interrogated Seaman David Smith, an Iowa crewman and friend of Hartwig. The NIS agents kept Smith in the interrogation room for 7 hours and 40 minutes and, according to Smith, repeatedly threatened that they would charge him with 47 counts of accessory to murder, perjury, and obstruction of justice unless he admitted that Hartwig had told him that he intended to blow up Turret Two. Smith refused. At 10 p.m., Smith was allowed to return to Iowa, where he then stood a nine-hour watch. Less than one hour after finishing the watch, Smith was taken back to the NIS building at Norfolk and interrogated for an additional six hours. Finally, Smith claimed that Hartwig had made romantic advances towards him, had shown him an explosive timer, and had threatened to blow up Turret Two. Three days later, however, Smith recanted his statement to the NIS in its entirety when he was asked to reread and reaffirm a transcript of the interrogation, and signed a statement to that effect.[61] Smith's original statement was later leaked to the media without noting that he had retracted it.


I seriously doubt those investigators thought that they were trying to get him to implicate an innocent man.  They almost certainly thought, however misguided, that they were helping ensure justice be served and the guilty party to pay.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 23, 2015, 05:25:31 AM
At issue is that turret explosions have been an issue since large warships with huge turrets. One has trouble believing that those involved in the investigation do not know that. It really seems to me that the US navy just did not want to admit that.

Maybe I am wrong. I tentative think there was dishonesty among navy investigators to whitewash the incident but of course I could be wrong.

Edit: I should say that I am not arguing with Adnan that the police believed they were convicting an innocent suspect.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 23, 2015, 02:44:44 PM
You very well could be right. Perhaps this was a bad example to illustrate my point.  The conclusion the navy reached about the jilted gay lover using a chemical detonator is... Absurd.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 23, 2015, 02:48:51 PM
I finished this episode and to be blunt, I am not a big fan of Islam. However, the anti-Islam screed which might have played a part of getting him convicted is horrible.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 23, 2015, 04:19:19 PM
I finished this episode and to be blunt, I am not a big fan of Islam. However, the anti-Islam screed which might have played a part of getting him convicted is horrible.

Yea, that was a bit over the top.  I also found all of the missing evidence a bit problematic too.  This is evidence that we KNOW they subpoenaed but it's nowhere to be found, nor was it turned over on discovery as required by law.  It's also quite interesting that they ONLY got the phone records of muslims.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on June 23, 2015, 04:25:37 PM
Yeah, and it makes the "find the real killer" narrative that much harder to fulfill. The defense is left saying "these testimonies, all of which mysteriously disappeared without ever being released to the defense team back during Adnan's initial trial, could not only have exculpated Adnan but may very well have pointed to the person who actually killed Hae Min Lee". That being said, maybe it's just me looking at this case so closely but I think they've got a great case that there was so much misconduct going on here that the only thing that's clear is that the prosecution's story has little to no basis in reality.

As for the Muslim "connection", I think that if anything that's a huge mark against the prosecution, as it *does* allow the defense to create a different narrative, that of an innocent man railroaded into prison through religious-based bigotry. I think that even after 9/11 we are a more liberal nation now than we were then in terms of tolerance, and as such a jury is much more likely to be sickened by this supposed motivation than they were in 2000.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 23, 2015, 05:05:29 PM
It shows that all police interactions need to be recorded, otherwise one can simply hide so much.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 23, 2015, 07:33:48 PM
I finished this episode and to be blunt, I am not a big fan of Islam. However, the anti-Islam screed which might have played a part of getting him convicted is horrible.

I agree.  It also makes me wonder if, had Adnan continued on the path he was on, what would he be like now.  He was a bright american teenager on his way to college.  Had he continued engaging in normal youthful behaviors like pot smoking and premarital relationships--things which his religion and religion in general consider "sinful"--would he have ended up this devout Muslim like he is now.

While from the outside we can see that him doing these teenage things and his eventual wrongful conviction ARENT in fact related, I can empathicize with someone in those circumstances coming to a different conclusion.  I feel like being in prison probably isn't the greatest environment in which to critically examine religion and come to a more enlightened conclusion, Yaknow?

And as to the states narrative about it being an honor killing, I feel like had the trial been about something that had actually happened in Pakistan--then it might not have been entirely out of the question.  Certainly would need more information to decide a murder did have such a motivation--but not out of the realm of possibility. 

But Adnan wasn't a Pakistani.  He was American.  The frequency of honor killings taking place within the confines of the US are nil to zero.  In fact, the only case I can think of was something out of Canada.  However now I wouid go back and want further information before I would even conclude that what was reported in the papers was even accurate.  That kind of thing just doesn't happen here.  Muslim Americans tend to be a priviledged minority compared to others in this country, and that has a lot to do with their affluence and willingness to assimilate into white cultural norms.  You just don't see honor killings like you do in news from far away places on the globe.

Edit: and wtf? A scarf != a veil, by any stretch of the imagination.  What would a young girl do with a scarf in Baltimore during the winter... Cover her face, or keep herself warm? Laughable.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 23, 2015, 08:31:16 PM
Among the younger generation of Americans generally, religiosity is diminishing. I don't get the feeling from Serial that he was very religious at the time. He seems to have been a mostly typical American with a bit of Islam tacked onto his "self."

The trouble is that prison in general is radicalizing with regards to religion. Might have even been necessary for Adnan to survive to become more religious. Needed to in effect find allies within the Islamic prison population.

From reading Amanda Knox's autobiography, it is hard being a nerd and an atheist in prison.  That said, she does show that somebody can still excel when they get out of prison. Another example being Martin Tankleff, who seems to have done well for himself after prison.

I am not sure how religious Rabia is although pictures of her have her in the moderate Islamic head covering. Does not seem to be suppressed otherwise. 

There have been a handful of honor killings in the US but they are more often against females within the family becoming too American for the parent's taste.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 25, 2015, 12:28:39 AM
I now understand what Adnan meant when he asked for a ride. . . . .Apparently the school is pretty large and he only meant a ride to the track not really off campus. I have a roommate who will drive to the mailbox even though it is only about couple of blocks away.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 25, 2015, 09:23:13 AM

There have been a handful of honor killings in the US but they are more often against females within the family becoming too American for the parent's taste.

So I have been thinking about this 'honor' killing bullcrap.  Basically it makes absolutely zero sense.  I could be wrong, but even if we assume that Adnan bought into this whole honor killing thing, don't you only honor kill female RELATIVES or wives?  Hae was neither.  It's just ridiculous. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 25, 2015, 11:18:57 AM

There have been a handful of honor killings in the US but they are more often against females within the family becoming too American for the parent's taste.

So I have been thinking about this 'honor' killing bullcrap.  Basically it makes absolutely zero sense.  I could be wrong, but even if we assume that Adnan bought into this whole honor killing thing, don't you only honor kill female RELATIVES or wives?  Hae was neither.  It's just ridiculous.

If that was presented to the jury, that should be able to be used in either the state of federal court level as needlessly prejudicial.
There are a couple of  cases I can think of.

The first is David Camm where he was tried for the murder of his wife and two children in spite of having a solid alibi. His first trial was overturned because one of the items of evidence brought against him was some affairs he had in the past. His second trial was overturned because the prosecutor argued that he molested his daughter without presenting any evidence. The third trial resulted in an acquittal.

The second was Mechele Linehan - she was convicted based on a letter by the victim stating that if he was found dead, she might have been the culprit as well as her liking the movie The Last Seduction. It was also overturned because it was seen as needlessly prejudicial. Alaska elected not to retry her.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 25, 2015, 03:01:34 PM
This is kinda jumping back to my Jay theory, but check out what I just discovered. 

So Jay's older brother is named Anthony, after their father.  Check out what older brother Anthony was arrested for on 7/31/2000:



(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CIXiWI4WsAAnsdn.jpg)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CIXgfFVWUAENv3K.jpg)


I really can't shake the feeling that Jay's involvement stemmed from someone he knew coming home driving that car.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 25, 2015, 04:17:19 PM
Might want to present this to the Undisclosed crowd and others. . . . .We have so many questions and so few answers though.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 25, 2015, 04:37:02 PM
:) www.twitter.com/echozus 

Been posting a bunch since yesterday when I settled the question as to whether 1998 Sentras contained any of the more-sophisticated ignition systems that companies were incorporating into their vehicles starting in the mid to late 90s.  All these systems involved an additional requirement from the physical key beyond simply turning the tumbler.  These involved transponders or other types of security chips programmed into keys -- so that the ignition wouldn't start without it's presence.

I discovered and tweeted to Colin how I came to the conclusion that no, 1998 Sentras did not have any of these security measures.  In fact 1994-1998 Sentras were practically the training example car one would use to demonstrate how to Hotwire cars back then.

Consequently, I also learned how basic hotwiring of these older cars generally worked (and specifically worked on 98 Sentra).  Not sure where i'd ever need this information... But it's kinda cool how simple it used to be.  So,
  1) Remove ignition collar  2) slightly open steering column 3) Severe both battery wires, the electrical systems wire, and ignition wire from where they connect to ignition tumbler. 4) Strip ends all four wires of plastic sheath. 5) Connect and tape Bat1 to Electrical.  6) Connect and tape Bat2 to Ignition. 7) push closed steering column.  8) Drive away.


I even got a couple responses from Colin =D.  Regardless of whether my proposed theory is correct, I'm stoked at adding a small tidbit of previously undocumented information.--regardless of how inconsequential to the big picture it might or might not be >=D
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 25, 2015, 04:57:35 PM
I found this out earlier when I was looking up transponder keys for the Sentra and found out that Sentra did not go to a transponder key until 2007 although there was a fob for the doors.

http://www.denver-locksmith.net/2014/01/nissan-sentra-key-replacement/
If your Nissan Sentra was made in the years 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, or 2006, then you have just a regular key with no features. This key does not have a chip and does not need to be programed to your car.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 25, 2015, 05:08:42 PM
http://undisclosed-podcast.com/docs/6/Consultant%27s%20Report%20on%20Islamic%20Thought%20and%20Culture.pdf

I recommend reading the last paragraph.  It's a textbook case of 'the sins of the fathers'

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 25, 2015, 05:11:16 PM
A bit more, look at where the log is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?t=29&v=zCK97ABV-UE

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 25, 2015, 05:19:48 PM
A bit more, look at where the log is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?t=29&v=zCK97ABV-UE

I am on mobile broadband in a horrible signal area. . . .Can you explain please?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on June 25, 2015, 05:20:53 PM
A bit more, look at where the log is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?t=29&v=zCK97ABV-UE

I am on mobile broadband in a horrible signal area. . . .Can you explain please?

When you get a chance, it's basically Rabia taking people to where the log is.  There's no way a guy was going there to 'take a leak'
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 25, 2015, 07:00:37 PM
http://undisclosed-podcast.com/docs/6/Consultant%27s%20Report%20on%20Islamic%20Thought%20and%20Culture.pdf

I recommend reading the last paragraph.  It's a textbook case of 'the sins of the fathers'

If that was used in court, that should be enough to overturn the conviction right there
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 25, 2015, 11:08:33 PM
Why did the guy put quotations around "ethnic" in the final sentence of the last paragraph?  Scare quotes?  But what is the author getting at?

Quote
For many "ethnic" Pakistanis incidents like this one are common place and in Pakistan...

Edit: as opposed to those "non-ethnic" Pakistanis? lol ?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 26, 2015, 02:25:08 AM
Ugh after spending some time just now subjecting myself to the snarky slings and arrows of the 1/99 Truthers (the Adnan is guilty ppl who scream "LOGIC!!!" at anyone who disagrees with them--yes... I know.... It's crazy but these are people who declare without reservation that he is guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt, and that there is way more than enough evidence proving it... And that anyone who can't see this must be mentally challenged and/or irrational trolls)  these people would fight viciously even with DI, that how extreme this crowd is--  I can't stand them, they utterly ruin Reddit. 

So anyways, I thought i'd take a moment to share with my rational homies here a kind of interesting piece of info that I was only able to put together because I had listened to two separate things in close proximity.  So on YouTube if you search Rabia Muslim Student Association Law School, there's a video of her giving a speech at this event at I think penn law school.  After she finished there's a Q and A from the audience, and one of the questions was "What is your personal best theory of what you guys think actually happened that day?"

Rabia responds "Do you mean what do I think? Or what does Adnan think?"

The audience quickly shouts "both! Both!"

Rabia then says that while she knows the answer to both questions, she can't speak about the second one.  She then mentions about Adnan currently having his appeal hearing and explains what SK said in episode 11 as to why Adnan seems so cool and calm--but the she finished with something that surprised me.  Not verbatim she says "You have to understand that Adnan is in a supermax state penitentiary.  It's the kind of place where well... Let's just say there's some dangerous people and Adnan doesn't want to get on anyone's bad side."

This would have seemed a kind of odd thing to finish on, except that earlier I had listened to the most recent episode of The Serial Dynasty podcast--an episode where Rabia was also being interviewed.  During that interview the host brings up the topic of Roy Davis came up, and the two discuss the fact that Roy Davis is actually in the same federal prison as Adnan.  The two certainly aren't friends, but "they are aware of each other."  Roy Davis rememver is the man who murdered Woodlawn high student Jada Lambert 9 months before Hae disapeared, strangling her and then dumped her body into a shallow grave in a different baltimore park (not Leakin).

Do you think I'm right to take this as meaning that what Adnan thinks most likely actually happened that day--was that Roy Davis murdered Hae the same way he murdered Jada?  I kinda think that's probably what Rabia had in mind.  Anyways, just a little tidbit I enjoyed when I heard it.  Figured you guys here might also (and wouldn't chew my head off and insult my intellect and penis size to boot for bringing it up, lol)

Thoughts?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 26, 2015, 06:32:39 AM
Rigor is easily broken when manipulating the body, especially if carried by the arms and legs.

Revisiting this. . . . According to the host of Serial Nation Dynasty, who is a fire fighter, rigor is not so easily broken when he has had to put into body bags bodies which are in rigor.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 26, 2015, 10:58:51 PM
Rigor is easily broken when manipulating the body, especially if carried by the arms and legs.

Revisiting this. . . . According to the host of Serial Nation, who is a fire fighter, rigor is not so easily broken when he has had to put into body bags bodies which are in rigor.

Do you mean Serial Dynasty?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 27, 2015, 07:05:26 AM
Rigor is easily broken when manipulating the body, especially if carried by the arms and legs.

Revisiting this. . . . According to the host of Serial Nation, who is a fire fighter, rigor is not so easily broken when he has had to put into body bags bodies which are in rigor.

Do you mean Serial Dynasty?

Sorry, yes  :-[
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 27, 2015, 06:02:00 PM
I really like that show.  It's the best Serial/Undisclosed commentary podcast IMO.  Crime Writers on Serial is good too.

Have any of you guys listened to Serial Theories and Spoilers Podcast by this guy Andrew Springsteen?  It is like.... Awful to a magnificent degree.  He literally spends large parts of episodes railing on various online bulletin board/comment section arguments he's gotten into.  Reading the reviews he's received is hilarious too.  The only podcast I've seen such with such unanimous denouncement is Skeptiko that credulous pseudoscience show.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 27, 2015, 07:23:05 PM
I have about as many podcasts as I can currently handle so probably will not be listening to any more about this case. There are also a number of cases past and present that are as disturbing as this one if not more so.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 27, 2015, 11:47:08 PM
It wasn't so much a recommendation--the show is absolutely horrible.  Was just curious if you had the misfortune of stumbling onto it like I had.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 28, 2015, 07:11:02 AM
It wasn't so much a recommendation--the show is absolutely horrible.  Was just curious if you had the misfortune of stumbling onto it like I had.

There are podcasts that get frustrating at times when they completely mangle a case. I will admit that the  Hannah Overton case was a tough case but I think a careful examination exonerates her.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on June 29, 2015, 01:39:51 PM
But GUYS, positing another killer totally violates Occam's Razor! You have to choose between Jay an Adnan! Those are your only choices. Or at least that is what I was told repeatedly way back on page 8.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on June 29, 2015, 02:39:21 PM
But GUYS, positing another killer totally violates Occam's Razor! You have to choose between Jay an Adnan! Those are your only choices. Or at least that is what I was told repeatedly way back on page 8.
No. It's fun to strawman though isn't it? When it was assumed Jay knew where the car was, introducing an outside person was needlessly making assumptions. In light of the fact that Jay was likely coached and knew nothing of the murder prior to the police it makes sense to look elsewhere. You either knew something the rest of us didn't know, or you got lucky. I'm going with #2. Gloat away.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 29, 2015, 02:54:14 PM
Listening to Skeptics Dynasty, I think the host make a statement he though minor but to me is completely damning.
The national average for clearing murders is 62%. The average for Baltimore is 95% (2004 statistics) and they had one of the highest murder rates in the country.  Either they are the most crackerjack police force in the country (evidence goes against that) or they railroad people all the time.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 29, 2015, 08:57:30 PM
But GUYS, positing another killer totally violates Occam's Razor! You have to choose between Jay an Adnan! Those are your only choices. Or at least that is what I was told repeatedly way back on page 8.
No. It's fun to strawman though isn't it? When it was assumed Jay knew where the car was, introducing an outside person was needlessly making assumptions. In light of the fact that Jay was likely coached and knew nothing of the murder prior to the police it makes sense to look elsewhere. You either knew something the rest of us didn't know, or you got lucky. I'm going with #2. Gloat away.


Actually I posited that Jay nor Adnan had nothing to do with it all the way back between Eps 10-11, and I have my girlfriend and my mother as witnesses!  Although I had many many things wrong (namely, that I was stuck assigning the agency behind Jay's changing stories to Jay), I realized that so so so many things would suddenly start making sense if Jay nor Adnan were involved that day.

Where I went wrong, as I hinted above, was trying to understand why Jay was changing his stories.  I couldn't figure it out--because check out any other real life murder mystery:  whenever someone lies and changes their story, you can always in hindsight understand why they change each story.  In fact, usually people's motives are extremely transparent and predictable.  Look at Casey Anthony and the lies she told.  Jay, on the other hand, his changes really seemed to make no sense whatsoever.  The changes weren't beneficial to him, they didn't hurt Adnan, they didn't protect anyone.  Jay says now he was trying to protect his friends who were going to college and his grandmother--but that doesn't make any sense either. 

Of course now we know the changes were all reflecting the cops most current attempt at interpreting the cell phone data, and them together with Jay playing the worlds most bizarre game of hot-cold (or the crappiest psychic in the world's drawn-out attempt at cold-reading).   

Anyways what was that original guy's point anyway refering to page 8? I'm just rambling now.  Was he trying to mock us?


EDIT:  no one here can verify with my mother or girlfriend, but here's a post I made on Reddit back in late December/early January (I think... 188 days ago, whenever that is)

https://m.reddit.com/r/serialpodcast/comments/2q52ji/what_i_originally_thought_was_a_fools_errand_and/

EDIT2: And again, there are MANY things in there I got wrong and no longer believe.  Just want to time stamp that I concluded that an important facet of Occam's Razor: that the solution involving the fewest new assumptions is the MOST LIKELY to be correct one--not ALWAYS the correct one.

Additionally, as is seen in the post, two sides can disagree as to what qualifies as a new assumption.  UFOlogists argue that it's a more complicated explanation that every single sighting is a case of mistaken identification or a hoax.  Similarly, the 1/99 Truthers argue the simplest explanation is that Jay's was telling the truth--at least about how Adnan did it.

All in all, I have found Occam's razor to be an incredibly unhelpful tool during this crowd sourced investigation.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on June 29, 2015, 09:02:27 PM
I think that in fairness, we know a lot more about the case than we did then and I think it's a lot easier to come to a conclusion based on the evidence that at the very least the prosecution's story won't fit. At that time (and I get this from having binge-listened to Crime Writers on Serial over the weekend) there was a completely legit thought process that, regardless of the fungibility of Jay's story, he also knew where the car was, and that's an awfully big also. It's since been all but demonstrated that his story was heavily coached and it's well within the range of possibility that he was given the location of the car by the police to subsequently "find", but that's not where we were last year.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 30, 2015, 12:21:37 AM
The reason I predicted early that Jay wasn't involved --and this hasALWAYS been my big problem with the whole thing -- was that Jay's role made no sense at every single stage. 

1) The "come and get me call" that wasn't.  Supposedly Jay's role here is to have Adnans cell phone so he can know when to come pick him up--but he never actually comes to pick him up.  Why? Because Adnan has Hae's car. Instead, Adnan supposedly calls Jay to... just sorta come, then follow behind Adnan in a separate car for most of the day--Why??  This makes no sense whatsoever.  WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF JAY BEING THERE? To witness  the crimes Adnan commits so he can testify against him later?

2) Why would Jay agree to get involved in the first place?  So Jay is threatened by Adnan that he will rat him out for his pot dealing.  So according to Jay the threat went like this... "You better help me dispose of this bitch I just murdered, and you better not tell anyone (including the cops), or IM gonna tell the cops about you dealing pot!" ...was the ultimatum? And the response Jay gave was not "You better not tell the cops about my pot dealings, or I'm gonna tell them about the murder. Check-Mate mutha f****."  ?

Supposedly later on, Adnan adds that the "east side hitman" is a buddy of his, and was threatening Jay with this as well.  If Adnan not only knew dangerous criminals, but one specifically who is known for murdering people on request by others--why on earth wouldn't Adnan have enlisted this east side hitman to help deal w/ Hae, instead of enlisting acquantance Jay?

3) The only real role Jay was needed for was to get Adnan back to his own car after ditching Hae's vehicle. This is because a single person cannot drive two cars at once.  This, however, is never referenced by Jay at all.  A bus would serve this same purpose, but without all the risk of including a second person.

4)  No motive. For neither Jay nor Adnan.  99.99% of high school breakups don't lead to murder.  Personally, my overwhelming emotion in response to being dumped in HS was pathetic desperation+wanting the girl to suddenly realize she does still love me.  Even in HS--the age of hyperbolic emotions--the motive of "she dumped me" leading to "murder her!" seems wholly atypical for most teenagers.  Especially since without exception every single witness who knew of the relationship, not one described Adnan as being anything but overly sensitive and gentle.

Then for Jay--Again there's no motive.  I just couldn't find any reasonable circumstance which Jay alone would end up murdering Hae. The few situations I dreamed up all seemed pretty wonky, and even if they occured, was more farfetched even still to have murder-strangulation be the result.

5) The one interrogation clip I fixated on way before Undisclosed blew the entire lid off of what was going on.  This one clip of Jay's interrogations which stood out to me the moment I heard it in Serial--I knew something very wrong was up. It goes like (not verba tim)

Detective: So why didn't you try to stop Adnan from killing Has?
Jay: Uhhh what do u mean? Like Uhm he said he was he was gonna kill her (somethin somethin)
Detective: No I mean, why when you had his phone, has his car, and you knew he was going to kill her, why didn't you do anything to stop him?
Jay: (pause) Uhm.. Hey could you stop that?
Detective: Hmm?
Jay: Could you just stop the tape... for a second?
Detective: Anything you need to ask me you can do so on tape.
Jay: (pause) I don't understand this line of questioning.
Detective: Look all I mean is that why, when you had (re-asks the same question but sounds frustrated)
Jay: I dunno... I guess Cuz I was like... Involved in it


Way before I truly understood the depth of everything that Undisclosed Ep3 revealed, that one exchange stood out to me.  I interpreted that as Jay thinking it was a mutually understood thing between him and the detectives, that everything he was saying was untrue, but that they were going ahead with it anyway.  I think it was at that moment though that Jay realized "Wow... These cops really still think I'm telling them the truth"  or at the very least "I guess we are still ignoring the gigantic pink elephant in the room then..."

Either way, it seemed (at the time--remember this is all based on knowledge circa December) the most probable (least improbable) option that If I could just find 1 THING: Jay coming upon the location of that car -- that SOO many other things would fall into place.  If I could find some coincidence or possible mechanism by which he found that car during those six weeks....I didn't know exactly, but it seemed like that one coincedence was more realistic than the mountains of illogical crap that had to be true if Jay's narrative were reality.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 30, 2015, 11:33:45 AM
It is interesting that the ATM she would have most likely used on route was right across from the house of a man later convicted through DNA of killing another student from her school.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on June 30, 2015, 01:21:56 PM
4)  No motive. For neither Jay nor Adnan.  99.99% of high school breakups don't lead to murder.  Personally, my overwhelming emotion in response to being dumped in HS was pathetic desperation+wanting the girl to suddenly realize she does still love me.  Even in HS--the age of hyperbolic emotions--the motive of "she dumped me" leading to "murder her!" seems wholly atypical for most teenagers.  Especially since without exception every single witness who knew of the relationship, not one described Adnan as being anything but overly sensitive and gentle.

Then for Jay--Again there's no motive.  I just couldn't find any reasonable circumstance which Jay alone would end up murdering Hae. The few situations I dreamed up all seemed pretty wonky, and even if they occured, was more farfetched even still to have murder-strangulation be the result.
Maybe this speaks not so well of me, but I have known people in my lifetime who wouldn't need a motive that a rational mind like yours or mine could understand. I never found motive to be that compelling. It's obviously a great place to start looking because most of the time it would line up and make sense, but so often peoples' behavior is inexplicable or even incongruent.

Quote
5) The one interrogation clip I fixated on way before Undisclosed blew the entire lid off of what was going on.  This one clip of Jay's interrogations which stood out to me the moment I heard it in Serial--I knew something very wrong was up. It goes like (not verba tim)

Detective: So why didn't you try to stop Adnan from killing Has?
Jay: Uhhh what do u mean? Like Uhm he said he was he was gonna kill her (somethin somethin)
Detective: No I mean, why when you had his phone, has his car, and you knew he was going to kill her, why didn't you do anything to stop him?
Jay: (pause) Uhm.. Hey could you stop that?
Detective: Hmm?
Jay: Could you just stop the tape... for a second?
Detective: Anything you need to ask me you can do so on tape.
Jay: (pause) I don't understand this line of questioning.
Detective: Look all I mean is that why, when you had (re-asks the same question but sounds frustrated)
Jay: I dunno... I guess Cuz I was like... Involved in it


Way before I truly understood the depth of everything that Undisclosed Ep3 revealed, that one exchange stood out to me.  I interpreted that as Jay thinking it was a mutually understood thing between him and the detectives, that everything he was saying was untrue, but that they were going ahead with it anyway.  I think it was at that moment though that Jay realized "Wow... These cops really still think I'm telling them the truth"  or at the very least "I guess we are still ignoring the gigantic pink elephant in the room then..."

Either way, it seemed (at the time--remember this is all based on knowledge circa December) the most probable (least improbable) option that If I could just find 1 THING: Jay coming upon the location of that car -- that SOO many other things would fall into place.  If I could find some coincidence or possible mechanism by which he found that car during those six weeks....I didn't know exactly, but it seemed like that one coincedence was more realistic than the mountains of illogical crap that had to be true if Jay's narrative were reality.
Yeah, I think it only works with either Jay was 100% involved, or Jay wasn't involved at all and was railroaded by the police because he had more to lose if he didn't go along. Now that we have more analysis and information than what Serial presented, it does seem that Jay was likely railroaded. There's just no way to reconcile him knowing the location of the car, unless he didn't truly know.

Legal type question: what would Jay have to lose now if he recanted his testimonial and came out and said the police coached him and coerced him?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on June 30, 2015, 04:16:20 PM
Legal type question: what would Jay have to lose now if he recanted his testimonial and came out and said the police coached him and coerced him?

IANAL, but I would imagine it would depend on what they had on him, and if he signed an "NDA / Statement" with criminal ramifications.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on June 30, 2015, 06:33:27 PM
But GUYS, positing another killer totally violates Occam's Razor! You have to choose between Jay an Adnan! Those are your only choices. Or at least that is what I was told repeatedly way back on page 8.
No. It's fun to strawman though isn't it? When it was assumed Jay knew where the car was, introducing an outside person was needlessly making assumptions. In light of the fact that Jay was likely coached and knew nothing of the murder prior to the police it makes sense to look elsewhere. You either knew something the rest of us didn't know, or you got lucky. I'm going with #2. Gloat away.

No, as I explained in detail way way back then, it never, ever made sense that either Adnan was involved nor that Jay committed the crime alone. Introducing a third person was the only way to make anything make sense.

"Given two equally plausible theories, the one that requires the fewest additional assumptions and also explains all of the facts thoroughly is the more likely to be true." This is Occam's razor. It was never plausible that Adnan was involved and Jay working alone would not have explained many important details, such as how he maneuvered both Adnan and Hae's cars during the time that he had both of them and more importantly many of his lies which, had he worked alone, would only have weakened the plausibility of his narrative and put him at significant risk. Occam's razor is exactly why I suspected a third party to begin with.

Admittedly I had almost every detail wrong back then. I had suspected a third party committed the murder and roped Jay into involvement. Now we know that a third party committed the murder and the police roped Jay into involvement. I did not suspect that the police were quite as corrupt as they now appear to be. But I certainly would have suspected police corruption long before I would have suspected that Jay worked alone.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on June 30, 2015, 06:38:19 PM
I agree that a third party without Jay's involvement is a very simple explanation that requires no more assumptions than the police coerced Jay. Jay with a third party had an insane number of assumptions. Had I considered the idea that Jay wasn't involved at all, then I think that makes perfect sense. At the time I (wrongly) took that part of the story at face value.

So you were right. For the wrong reasons.  ;D ;)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on June 30, 2015, 06:41:12 PM
Anyways what was that original guy's point anyway refering to page 8? I'm just rambling now.  Was he trying to mock us?

I was not mocking you specifically. I was mocking the people who told me that introducing a third party to the narrative was highly unlikely because it violated Occam's Razor. It sounds like you and I had very similar attitudes (albeit different theories) towards the plausibility of Jay or Adnan as the killer.

That's BS of course. The most likely person to have killed Hae was the person who killed Hae. Just because that person wasn't featured on the Serial podcast doesn't mean that person wasn't likely to have killed her.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: lofgren on June 30, 2015, 06:42:29 PM
I agree that a third party without Jay's involvement is a very simple explanation that requires no more assumptions than the police coerced Jay. Jay with a third party had an insane number of assumptions. Had I considered the idea that Jay wasn't involved at all, then I think that makes perfect sense. At the time I (wrongly) took that part of the story at face value.

So you were right. For the wrong reasons.  ;D ;)

Jay with a third party required one assumption: Jay substituted Adnan's name for the third party in his "confession." That's all it took.

I was told repeatedly that I was making too many assumptions and yet nobody could actually list them for me beyond this one.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on June 30, 2015, 07:30:58 PM
I agree that a third party without Jay's involvement is a very simple explanation that requires no more assumptions than the police coerced Jay. Jay with a third party had an insane number of assumptions. Had I considered the idea that Jay wasn't involved at all, then I think that makes perfect sense. At the time I (wrongly) took that part of the story at face value.

So you were right. For the wrong reasons.  ;D ;)

Jay with a third party required one assumption: Jay substituted Adnan's name for the third party in his "confession." That's all it took.

I was told repeatedly that I was making too many assumptions and yet nobody could actually list them for me beyond this one.
Well, no, not really just one assumption. What lies behind that one changed detail is a whole new string of assumptions, which is what I think all of us bickering with you had an issue with. The police fabricating a witness to land a conviction is a lot less complicated than an unknown person capitalizing on the situation and manipulating Jay from outside without detection from the police or multiple parties looking to overturn Adnan's conviction.
I think this is a perfect example of how something like Occam's Razor is only useful when you have more control and knowledge of the details because even by using what you saw as the "least complicated" solution still was as incorrect as any of us were in saying if Jay was involved it was likely Adnan was as well. Only your theory was wrong because it added in details that tied in to the main narrative which were incorrect, and the other side (myself included) was wrong because we didn't have the details that suggested the base of the premise was faulty. We still don't know if Jay was coached and fabricated the thing 100%, but by using the law of parsimony it is certainly more desirable than saying Jay implicated Adnan to cover for someone no one near the case knows anything about.

So even if you reached the right conclusion you certainly didn't do it through the simplest route with the information on hand. But at any rate, what happens next with Adnan is going to be far more interesting than this debate.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on June 30, 2015, 07:33:08 PM
One of the simple facts is that even if Jay knew where the car was, he seemed to not know any of the details of what happened. That is why I tend to think it most likely he is not involved.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 30, 2015, 09:44:00 PM
Legal type question: what would Jay have to lose now if he recanted his testimonial and came out and said the police coached him and coerced him?

IANAL, but I would imagine it would depend on what they had on him, and if he signed an "NDA / Statement" with criminal ramifications.

There is No Way Jay would suffer any legal repercussions involving perjury--because doing so would require the state to make the case that they prosecuted and convicted Adnan using false testimony.  If there existed even tacit approval from the prosecution of this (or hell, even in the non-existent likelyhood there actually wasn't, it would sure make a fantastic defense if he claimed there was anyway)--then the state REALLY doesn't want to push that case in court.

By example, look at the wrongful conviction of Ryan Ferguson.  There's a couple witnesses, but in particular a guy named Klumpe or Trump or something like that--his first interview with the police said he couldn't have identified the perpetrator. Then during the trial he gave testimony implicating Ferguson.  Now many years later he's recanted the testimony, and that he knowingly perjured himself on the witness stand.

The state not only wont be pushing perjury charges on him, they in fact now take the absurd position that he was lying initially, and is lying now, and that the only time this man had told the truth was when he testified during the trial (despite him now admitting to perjury).  Ridiculous, but that's what the state would likely do if Jay were to recant his testimony now.


----


As far as other repercussions, I think this is why Jay will stand by his story.  For the past 15 years since the murder trial, Jay has been arrested over half a dozen times.  Nevertheless he has never served a single day in jail.  Why?  I think after establishing a relationship with the police/DA he has milked the benefits since then--likely as an informant.  But who knows.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 30, 2015, 09:52:58 PM
Also, I think that it's quite possible Jay did know the location of that car, and also had nothing to do with the murder that day.  Keep in mind that the car's location was not really all that far from where Jay lived, and was even closer to the "drug strips" which he frequented sometimes multiple times daily.  We also know that Jay would have been able to recognize Hae's car on his own.

Look at the photos of Hae's car where it was found.  Notice the car next to it?  It has a Club antitheft device on it, and also has its rear driver side window broken in.  This was an era of time in an area where car theft was rampant.  The likelyhood that Hae's car sat around over a month, without anyone trying to steal it or break in, is unlikely. 

This is further evidenced by the fact that the ignition collar had been removed.  I believe that after the killer ditched the car, that it was on some later date stolen.  I believe whoever stole it, had some cobbection to Jay.  I'll go into more detail later, but Jay's  older brother Anthony is an excellent fit. It was this which led to Jay feeling he had some "insider information" on Hae's murder, at which point he bragged to the couple friends of his that he knew how she died, prior to being picked up and being railroaded by the cops.  I don't think Adnan was a part of the story, until the cops pushed him down that road.

P.s. Scroll up a few pages, where I show how Anthony Wilds (Jay's brother) was arrested for GTA just one year later on 7/30/2000.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on June 30, 2015, 10:00:53 PM
Ok so I just spent the last thirty minutes collating all of Jay's records on the Maryland Court Records Database, to highlight how much he's been in trouble with the law over the last 15 years, yet has still never been sentenced to served a single day.

Source: http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/casesearch/processDisclaimer.jis






Incident Date  1/27/1999
    - Disorderly Conduct
    - Resisting Arrest
Outcome: Stet


Incident Date (supposedly)  1/13/1999
    - Accessory after the fact
Outcome: 2 Years Supervised Probation


Incident Date  7/12/2001
   - Theft Less Than $500
Outcome: Stet


Incident Date  9/7/2001
   - Drug Paraphernalia
   - Driving with Suspended License
Outcome: 1 Year Suspended in lieu of  continued Supervised Probation (Presumably from prior case?), $300 Fine.

Incident Date  7/22/2006
   - Assault 2nd Degree
Outcome: Noelle Prosequi [/i], from Wikipedia:
 A legal term of art and a Latin legal phrasemeaning "be unwilling to pursue", a phrase amounting to "do not prosecute". It is a phrase used in many common law criminal prosecution contexts to describe a prosecutor's decision to voluntarily discontinue criminal charges either before trial or before a verdict is rendered.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolle_prosequi   


Incident Date  10/18/2006
   - Theft Less Than $100
Outcome: Noelle Prosequi


Incident Date  4/9/2009
   - Assault 2nd Degree
   - Assault 2nd Degree
   - Assault 2nd Degree
   - Assault 2nd Degree on Law Enforcement Officer
   - Assault 2nd Degree on Law Enforcement Officer
   - Failure to Obey a Reasonable and Lawful Order
   - Resist/Interfere with Arrest
Outcome: Stet... AGAIN!?


Incident Date  6/19/2009
   - Possession: Marijuana
   - Trespassing: Posted Property
Outcome: On Marijuana Possession found Guilty, $250 Fine.   On Trespassing, Noelle Prosequi.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 01, 2015, 12:38:50 AM
There are certain people who just seem to be able to skate through criminal charges and nothing ever seems to fit permanently. . . .If you are familiar with the West Memphis Three,  John Mark Byers seems to be able to sail through numerous serious charges without ever going to prison.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on July 01, 2015, 07:42:08 AM
A Stet refers to a specific agreement between Prosecutor and Defendant--the very first one concerning the 1/27/99 incident we know about--the stet was entered as a result of Jay's testifying in Adnans trial.

So what if the others? And the Noelle Prosequi?  You saying you think it's more likely that he's just one of those lucky sorts of guys--rather than that he has simply sustained an off-&-on relationship with the DAs office where Jay gets Stets and Noelle Prosequis, and the state gets something that benefits them in some small ways?

EDIT: I am exhausted and wasn't able to do anything resembling a thorough research effort, but from skimming Google, there are references to it being established at least one example of John Mark Byers being a drug informant for police.  This is typically the reason why certain individuals seem "super lucky" when it comes to charges never being filed or prosecuted.  No DA office chooses not to prosecute a case just Cuz', not unless there's a reason for turning a blind eye.

...which is exactly the sort of relationship that's evident Jay has sustained over the years.  Pretty much every charge I listed above is a FELONY.  There's only a handful of misdemeanors. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on July 07, 2015, 01:18:01 AM
Anyways what was that original guy's point anyway refering to page 8? I'm just rambling now.  Was he trying to mock us?

I was not mocking you specifically. I was mocking the people who told me that introducing a third party to the narrative was highly unlikely because it violated Occam's Razor. It sounds like you and I had very similar attitudes (albeit different theories) towards the plausibility of Jay or Adnan as the killer.

That's BS of course. The most likely person to have killed Hae was the person who killed Hae. Just because that person wasn't featured on the Serial podcast doesn't mean that person wasn't likely to have killed her.

Well put.  I think also that people are misapplying Occam's Razor by using it as an accurate method to determine the truth among multiple plausible theories.  Occam's razor is a useful heuristic, it is not a method to critically examine a situation and prove which hypothesis is correct.  It is a good rule of thumb, a critical thinking shortcut to give you a decent approximation.  that's all. 

Really, Occam's Razor is simply a simplistic version of using prior plausibility to make an educated guess.  The problem is though that when you give Occam's razor a binary choice (and this isn't even going into the problem with false dichotomy here, let's just assume that just two options are possible for now), it has no way of distinguishing between different binary choices:  It gives the same level of confidence in any two-competing-explanations situation every time Occam's is applied.  So in one the prior plausibilities might be 70/30, whereas the next is 99.99/0.01.  Occam's razor suggests whichever has the more plausible basis and fewest new unlikely assumptions needing to be true, that we can conclude what is true from that alone.

It's almost like the prosecutors fallacy.  In the Sally Clark case, the british woman charged with killing her two children, rather than both dying from SIDS, the prosecution told jury the likelyhood of one mother losing two kids to SIDS was like 1 in 72 billion or something.  The jury then thinks "wow.  That's pretty unlikely and a pretty complicated explanation. Much more likely she just killed them."   -- but in reality, while it is rare for that to happen, it's actually even rarer for a mother to murder two of her kids on separate occasions.  Like insanely unlikely.  People treated "Adnan just did it" as this null hypothesis-- with out taking into consideration that a 17-year old with no history of violence whatsoever before (or since) murdering his ex-gf multiple weeks after breaking up---that is also a rare event!! 

People however treat it as this totally most likeky conclusion based mostly on the fact (I think) that he was arrested and charged with the crime.  W

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on July 07, 2015, 01:14:07 PM
Anyways what was that original guy's point anyway refering to page 8? I'm just rambling now.  Was he trying to mock us?

I was not mocking you specifically. I was mocking the people who told me that introducing a third party to the narrative was highly unlikely because it violated Occam's Razor. It sounds like you and I had very similar attitudes (albeit different theories) towards the plausibility of Jay or Adnan as the killer.

That's BS of course. The most likely person to have killed Hae was the person who killed Hae. Just because that person wasn't featured on the Serial podcast doesn't mean that person wasn't likely to have killed her.

Well put.  I think also that people are misapplying Occam's Razor by using it as an accurate method to determine the truth among multiple plausible theories.  Occam's razor is a useful heuristic, it is not a method to critically examine a situation and prove which hypothesis is correct.  It is a good rule of thumb, a critical thinking shortcut to give you a decent approximation.  that's all. 
No one really used it that way, but okay.

Quote
It's almost like the prosecutors fallacy.  In the Sally Clark case, the british woman charged with killing her two children, rather than both dying from SIDS, the prosecution told jury the likelyhood of one mother losing two kids to SIDS was like 1 in 72 billion or something.  The jury then thinks "wow.  That's pretty unlikely and a pretty complicated explanation. Much more likely she just killed them."   -- but in reality, while it is rare for that to happen, it's actually even rarer for a mother to murder two of her kids on separate occasions.  Like insanely unlikely.  People treated "Adnan just did it" as this null hypothesis-- with out taking into consideration that a 17-year old with no history of violence whatsoever before (or since) murdering his ex-gf multiple weeks after breaking up---that is also a rare event!! 
Except that most murders are committed by people known to the victim, so by that line of reasoning a random serial killer is more unlikely. Also, conveniently, you state the likelihood of SIDS striking twice is low, but we can't ignore that, then turn around and say the likelihood of a previously non-violent person becoming violent is low so we should pay attention to that. Considering that almost every serial killer ever had most neighbors fooled into thinking they were charming and harmless makes me not really care much for his prior behavior. Every criminal starts somewhere, it's not like he had 40 years of peace behind him. Granted he doesn't have most of the anti-social markers kids who shoot up schools have, but again, trading in likelihoods...

So this was a discussion about the serial podcast and most of us were making judgements based on the info we were given. Even lofgren attempted to make a 3rd party fit the serial podcast narrative. In hindsight, with more info, I don't think any of us believe Adnan was guilty, and in the light of Jay being fed every single detail of the murder and the car's location it seems insane to think we ever believed Adnan was guilty. But of course, we used the info we had and didn't make narratives up. Is this a bad thing? Maybe. Someone like Adnan could be judged and sent away if we are lied to or have facts obfuscated.
I think though it's the only reasonable way to think, otherwise anomaly hunting becomes de rigeur. If Jay's testimony just didn't "feel right" and we went out trying to discredit what should be "facts" in this case, how is that skepticism? Of course skepticism won the day too because more of the intentionally suppressed material came forward, and we all came around to it.
I've never particularly loved the Warren Commission's report on the JFK assassination, but we see how far afield people go when things don't feel like they add up. Until we knew the police lied and manipulated Jay completely and not partially, how could we assume 100% of Jay's testimony was bollocks? Did you know that for certain?

This is a pretty good example of how skepticism should work.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on July 07, 2015, 04:02:35 PM
While I know that sociopathy can make someone appear superficially charming, the whole "he was such a nice guy" thing is almost always just that - superficial. Most serial killers tend to have a lot of trouble holding a job or engaging in long term relationships or doing anything that requires more than a superficial application of effort. While often intelligent, they tend to be underemployed due to this factor. So it is perfectly reasonable to look at a person who has been married for years and has also held a job for a long time and assume that the prior plausibility of them being a sociopath is low.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on July 07, 2015, 05:37:52 PM
While I know that sociopathy can make someone appear superficially charming, the whole "he was such a nice guy" thing is almost always just that - superficial. Most serial killers tend to have a lot of trouble holding a job or engaging in long term relationships or doing anything that requires more than a superficial application of effort. While often intelligent, they tend to be underemployed due to this factor. So it is perfectly reasonable to look at a person who has been married for years and has also held a job for a long time and assume that the prior plausibility of them being a sociopath is low.
Sure. Since Adnan held a job and a marriage together for years...  ;D ;)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on July 07, 2015, 05:53:39 PM
While I know that sociopathy can make someone appear superficially charming, the whole "he was such a nice guy" thing is almost always just that - superficial. Most serial killers tend to have a lot of trouble holding a job or engaging in long term relationships or doing anything that requires more than a superficial application of effort. While often intelligent, they tend to be underemployed due to this factor. So it is perfectly reasonable to look at a person who has been married for years and has also held a job for a long time and assume that the prior plausibility of them being a sociopath is low.
Sure. Since Adnan held a job and a marriage together for years...  ;D ;)
He had good grades in school (something young sociopaths tend not to have) and no prior criminal record (compare and contrast with, say, Eric Harris of Columbine infamy, who was arrested along with Dylan Klebold a year prior to the shooting for breaking into a vehicle) (I should point out that apparently Harris, who was in retrospect the motivator of that shooting, did maintain good grades but who also foreshadowed the crap out of what he was going to do in his schoolwork). Even by that age, there tend to be signs. Again, I'm not saying this means that Adnan was absolutely not a sociopath, but it does seem rather unlikely that he'd do such a good job of hiding it.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on July 07, 2015, 06:13:33 PM
No, I agree with you. But as was the case with other things we didn't get the full story from Serial, just what Sarah thought was relevant. I just have a low threshold of trust for humans at the moment. Even the best among people I know seem capable of being horrible to each other.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on July 07, 2015, 07:59:44 PM
No, I agree with you. But as was the case with other things we didn't get the full story from Serial, just what Sarah thought was relevant. I just have a low threshold of trust for humans at the moment. Even the best among people I know seem capable of being horrible to each other.
Well... if the case that was presented was that Adnan really hadn't gotten over Hae and strangled her in a fit of rage or something, that would have been a lot more believable. It's hard even now to fit the facts of the case to that idea - you need Adnan and Jay conspiring all day long to make the timeline work at all (and of course it still doesn't work but that's besides the point) - and so you almost have to paint him as a sociopath, and apparently a really dumb sociopath at that to not tie up what would have been obvious loose ends like shoring up an alibi or ditching the car, in order to pin the murder on him.

Which, I know, you agree with already; I was just putting that out there in case DESERT FOX TRIES TO INVEST US WITH MORE TALES OF HOW ADNAN IS SECRETLY INNOCENT YOU KNOW WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT SIR >:(
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 07, 2015, 09:06:58 PM
Umm, what?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 07, 2015, 09:19:29 PM
Haha.  Johnny you make me laugh.  Sometimes.  Only sometimes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on July 08, 2015, 12:21:27 PM
Anyways what was that original guy's point anyway refering to page 8? I'm just rambling now.  Was he trying to mock us?

I was not mocking you specifically. I was mocking the people who told me that introducing a third party to the narrative was highly unlikely because it violated Occam's Razor. It sounds like you and I had very similar attitudes (albeit different theories) towards the plausibility of Jay or Adnan as the killer.

That's BS of course. The most likely person to have killed Hae was the person who killed Hae. Just because that person wasn't featured on the Serial podcast doesn't mean that person wasn't likely to have killed her.

Well put.  I think also that people are misapplying Occam's Razor by using it as an accurate method to determine the truth among multiple plausible theories.  Occam's razor is a useful heuristic, it is not a method to critically examine a situation and prove which hypothesis is correct.  It is a good rule of thumb, a critical thinking shortcut to give you a decent approximation.  that's all. 
No one really used it that way, but okay.

Quote
It's almost like the prosecutors fallacy.  In the Sally Clark case, the british woman charged with killing her two children, rather than both dying from SIDS, the prosecution told jury the likelyhood of one mother losing two kids to SIDS was like 1 in 72 billion or something.  The jury then thinks "wow.  That's pretty unlikely and a pretty complicated explanation. Much more likely she just killed them."   -- but in reality, while it is rare for that to happen, it's actually even rarer for a mother to murder two of her kids on separate occasions.  Like insanely unlikely.  People treated "Adnan just did it" as this null hypothesis-- with out taking into consideration that a 17-year old with no history of violence whatsoever before (or since) murdering his ex-gf multiple weeks after breaking up---that is also a rare event!! 
Except that most murders are committed by people known to the victim, so by that line of reasoning a random serial killer is more unlikely. Also, conveniently, you state the likelihood of SIDS striking twice is low, but we can't ignore that, then turn around and say the likelihood of a previously non-violent person becoming violent is low so we should pay attention to that. Considering that almost every serial killer ever had most neighbors fooled into thinking they were charming and harmless makes me not really care much for his prior behavior. Every criminal starts somewhere, it's not like he had 40 years of peace behind him. Granted he doesn't have most of the anti-social markers kids who shoot up schools have, but again, trading in likelihoods...

So this was a discussion about the serial podcast and most of us were making judgements based on the info we were given. Even lofgren attempted to make a 3rd party fit the serial podcast narrative. In hindsight, with more info, I don't think any of us believe Adnan was guilty, and in the light of Jay being fed every single detail of the murder and the car's location it seems insane to think we ever believed Adnan was guilty. But of course, we used the info we had and didn't make narratives up. Is this a bad thing? Maybe. Someone like Adnan could be judged and sent away if we are lied to or have facts obfuscated.
I think though it's the only reasonable way to think, otherwise anomaly hunting becomes de rigeur. If Jay's testimony just didn't "feel right" and we went out trying to discredit what should be "facts" in this case, how is that skepticism? Of course skepticism won the day too because more of the intentionally suppressed material came forward, and we all came around to it.
I've never particularly loved the Warren Commission's report on the JFK assassination, but we see how far afield people go when things don't feel like they add up. Until we knew the police lied and manipulated Jay completely and not partially, how could we assume 100% of Jay's testimony was bollocks? Did you know that for certain?

This is a pretty good example of how skepticism should work.

My point is simply that Occam's razor is often a tool used by both sides of an argument, because what qualifies as "new assumptions" can vary wildly.  Additionally, some new assumptions are easier to accept than others. 

I think you misunderstand.  I'm not saying everyone here should have decided in the opposite direction.  I'm saying that this is a good example of why Occam's razor is an overrated tool.  You assume I'm saying I used it correctly and you used it incorrectly.  I'm not.  I'm saying that if one wants to go down that path, you should use Bayesian prior plausibilities to analyze--if at all.

Besides, the argument you are making suggests that if it was someone she knew personally, it was Adnan.  Why?  Hae knew lots of people.  Don comes to mind immediately.  Granted SK told everyone the most poorly researched info ever by describing his alibi as "solid." Still, it's been known online the details of that.  I feel like people think of only Adnan because he was being charged.   Remember just because someone is charged is not a piece of evidence in and of itself.

Finally, I appreciate the straw man, but the reason I personally concluded most likely neither Jay nor Adnan were involved so early on was not that "something didn't feel right"--it's from a huge amalgamation of things. First and foremost however it was that his story was wholly implausible. Twilight zone levels of straining credibility on what's realistic. Maybe it's becaude I've been arrested on a couple occassions and have been part of the criminal justice system as a non-willing participant, and simply understood that there were more possibilities than 1) Jay is telling the truth and 2) Jay's lied are all stemming from Jay.  I knew early on that there was AT LEAST one additional possibility--that the police laid heavy into Jay and threatened him with harsh prosecution if he didn't "roll over on Adnan."

IF a child tells you some outlandish story in which nobody's motivation makes sense, nobodies behaviors make sense, and absolutely nothing in the story sounds plausible--do you believe them anywat because otherwise it would be anomaly hunting?  I keep coming back to the problem with Jay's story tgat he had no reason for being there.  Adnan calls him to "pick him up--but Adnan already had a car! Jay shows up so he can follow Adnan around in a separate car all day?  This is like the kid saying someone broke into his house to steal his homework.  Is it possible? Sure, people break into houses.  Is it likely though? 



EDIT: to preempt the straw man response ahead of time: when I refer to motivations not making sense im not talking about an ex-boyfriends motivation to kill an ex-girlfriend.  I'm talking about all the step by step parts of the day, starting with why Adnan would call Jay to follow him around while he committed crimes all day, for no purpose whatsoever.  The prosecutions narrative is like something out of the twilight zone in terms of how people behave in real life-even murderers.

EDIT2: And lastly to prove my point:  the proof is in the pudding.  If Occam's razor was such a reliable useful tool, then why did you arrive at the wrong conclusion by using it? If I have learned anything from this experience, it's that Occam's razor when used in real life (not in a controlled setting) is the biggest smokescreen for cognitive biases and critical thinking errors to creep in and have skeptical-sounding camouflage to mask themselves. This is because of how difficult it is to weight various "new assumptions" and an absence of assessing how short of the full data set you are.  It ends up being a series of entirely subjective and largely unjustifiable decisions being made--are you surprised it led many people astray? 

Bayesian analysis is a much better bet, IMO, moving forward from here.  Besides, William of Occam was kind of a chump. No game at all, that dude.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 08, 2015, 01:26:01 PM
One of the biggest failures with police (and prosecutors as well) is that they do not true to disprove their hypothesis.
Hypothesis - Adnan murdered Hae - What might we be able to find to show that our hypothesis is wrong. Only if you cannot find anything against that hypothesis should you prosecute.  I think a bit of science education would be a very good thing with regards to them.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on July 08, 2015, 02:19:15 PM
EDIT: to preempt the straw man response ahead of time: when I refer to motivations not making sense im not talking about an ex-boyfriends motivation to kill an ex-girlfriend.  I'm talking about all the step by step parts of the day, starting with why Adnan would call Jay to follow him around while he committed crimes all day, for no purpose whatsoever.  The prosecutions narrative is like something out of the twilight zone in terms of how people behave in real life-even murderers.
I wasn't even going to respond until I got to that, that's a pretty low blow tactic in an conversation though... I just didn't see it as implausible as you did and any bad feelings I had about Jay's testimony I dismissed as knowing he was lying, but what about, I couldn't say specifically.

Quote
EDIT2: And lastly to prove my point:  the proof is in the pudding.  If Occam's razor was such a reliable useful tool, then why did you arrive at the wrong conclusion by using it? If I have learned anything from this experience, it's that Occam's razor when used in real life (not in a controlled setting) is the biggest smokescreen for cognitive biases and critical thinking errors to creep in and have skeptical-sounding camouflage to mask themselves. This is because of how difficult it is to weight various "new assumptions" and an absence of assessing how short of the full data set you are.  It ends up being a series of entirely subjective and largely unjustifiable decisions being made--are you surprised it led many people astray? 

Bayesian analysis is a much better bet, IMO, moving forward from here.  Besides, William of Occam was kind of a chump. No game at all, that dude.
hilariously no one used Occam's Razor to arrive at Adnan is guilty, maybe you just didn't read all the way through (that's forgivable, it's a lot of speculation as the details unfolded over months). It was invoked to stop making needless assumptions - specifically that Jay knew the killer, was involved in the murder with a third party, and covered for him. So come correct next time if you're really so concerned you're being strawmanned. You can see how Occam's Razor was actually correct in this situation because Jay wasn't likely involved at all. And as we learned, the simplest version of this was correct - that none of it was true. Particularly not a version where Jay carts around a shadowy third party.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on July 08, 2015, 02:22:30 PM
And to be clear, because despite your worry that you're getting a strawman version of your position, Occam's Razor wasn't invoked to say Adnan was guilty, it was invoked to argue against a version that was needlessly complicated and turned out to be untrue. Simpler to believe Adnan was involved than an unknown third party with Jay, and even simpler and less multiplicative to say Jay wasn't involved at all and was coached by the police while a third party went undetected.

I still fail to see what your objection is to how it was used...
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 08, 2015, 11:58:04 PM
I think you used Occam's razor correctly in the sense that there might have been a larger number of facts but there were a ton more inferences and pieces between those facts that were either assumptions or guesses.  In the end the answer seems to be that no matter which way you look at it and even if you read everything in the worst light possible for Adnan, you never get to 'guilty beyond a reasonable doubt'.  The mere fact that Jay lies about everything kills that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 10, 2015, 09:12:12 PM
I had a simple thought with this case. . . .Is the crime simply too sophisticated for a 17 year old?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 10, 2015, 09:34:39 PM
I had a simple thought with this case. . . .Is the crime simply too sophisticated for a 17 year old?

No, it could very well be a straight up strangulation and subsequent burial.  I don't think there's too much more to it than that.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on July 10, 2015, 09:39:39 PM
I had a simple thought with this case. . . .Is the crime simply too sophisticated for a 17 year old?
What Belg said. The case the cops put together, yes I think that's too sophisticated (and requires Adnan to be too many disparate things), but obviously that's not the only way it could have gone down. I will say that the fact that there could be a relatively simple explanation that leads to Adnan killing Hae as opposed to the complicated conspiracy the cops cobbled together is going to be a big roadblock in his getting his eventual freedom.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 10, 2015, 10:10:13 PM
What Belg said. The case the cops put together, yes I think that's too sophisticated (and requires Adnan to be too many disparate things), but obviously that's not the only way it could have gone down. I will say that the fact that there could be a relatively simple explanation that leads to Adnan killing Hae as opposed to the complicated conspiracy the cops cobbled together is going to be a big roadblock in his getting his eventual freedom.

I was examining a case where the prosecution where two weeks before a retrial, the prosecution changes the timeline from 7 pm to 3 am. How do you prepare for that?

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 13, 2015, 11:52:41 PM
One item I don't understand is that with the meltdown his lawyer had and that she was later disbarred, I don't understand why any arguments of ineffective assistance of council were not successful. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on July 14, 2015, 01:19:53 AM
One item I don't understand is that with the meltdown his lawyer had and that she was later disbarred, I don't understand why any arguments of ineffective assistance of council were not successful.
It's apparently very tricky and you can't just cite her off-the-field behavior, you have to point to a specific error she made and show that it was in fact an error and not merely a decision/opinion on how she ought to run the case. FWIW that's exactly what Syed's appeal is doing right now, and double FWIW Gutierrez had another client's conviction get overturned due to ineffective counsel (that client being the next one she took after Syed, I believe).
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 14, 2015, 05:02:43 AM
One item I don't understand is that with the meltdown his lawyer had and that she was later disbarred, I don't understand why any arguments of ineffective assistance of council were not successful.
It's apparently very tricky and you can't just cite her off-the-field behavior, you have to point to a specific error she made and show that it was in fact an error and not merely a decision/opinion on how she ought to run the case. FWIW that's exactly what Syed's appeal is doing right now, and double FWIW Gutierrez had another client's conviction get overturned due to ineffective counsel (that client being the next one she took after Syed, I believe).

Kind of hoping that Maryland is at least a bit better than Texas in that regard however.
http://articles.latimes.com/2000/jul/15/news/mn-53250
HOUSTON — When George McFarland was accused of robbing and killing a neighborhood grocery owner, he took the advice of an acquaintance and hired longtime criminal lawyer John E. Benn. That may prove to be a fatal mistake.

Benn was 72 years old and had not handled a capital murder trial for at least 19 years. Nor did he jump headlong into the new case--he spent four hours preparing for the 1992 trial. Benn did not examine the crime scene, interviewed no witnesses, prepared no motions, did not request that any subpoenas be issued, relied solely on what was in the prosecutor's file, and visited his client only twice.

During the 17-day trial, Benn's performance took a turn for the worse: He fell asleep.

"Benn slept during great portions of the witness testimony," juror Mary Louisa Jensen said in an affidavit five years later. "It was so blatant and disgusting that it was the subject of conversation within the jury panel a couple of times."
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 14, 2015, 07:23:41 AM
So if you killed your girlfriend and you then enlisted the help of Jay to bury her and hide the car.  Then you hear one night that the police have taken Jay in and are questioning him, would you go quietly to sleep that night?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on July 14, 2015, 07:48:29 AM


I still fail to see what your objection is to how it was used...

??? My objection is that it's used, not how it's used.  Please read my post carefully from here down, because I'm unsure how you arrived at asking me that question.  I made it very very clear what my point was, and it has nothing to do with what you just said.

Quote
If Jay's testimony just didn't "feel right" and we went out trying to discredit what should be "facts" in this case, how is that skepticism?

This is what I was responding to when I said I felt my point was being straw manned.  This and the entire rest of that paragraph.

At first I thought that was what you were doing. Now I'm thinking you are fundamentally misunderstanding what I am talking about.  I said this at the beginning of the last post, but I'll repeat it again:

I'm not saying that you misused Occam's Razor.  I'm not saying that I used it correctly.  I'm saying that Occams Razor is a very overrated and not particularly useful tool in real world situations when you don't already know the correct answer ahead of time.

Picture a guy using a dousing rod on stage. When the bins aren't covered and he knows the correct one ahead of time, he can demonstrate how his magic wand works and show what a useful tool it is.  However when the bins are covered and he doesn't already know the correct answer, he flounders.

Now I'm not saying Occam's razor is as fundamentally illogical as water dousing.  In fact it is based in good skeptical principals.  And in situations when you know the correct answer ahead of time, it can be used to great success to show a 2nd time why it's correct.

However in real world situations where you don't already know the correct answer ahead of time, it becomes really quite useless as a tool.  It ends up being used as justification for arguments that couldn't be backed up on their own accord. 

And yes, both sides have argued that Occam's razor is on their side--and in fact still do to this day. just go to the Serial subreddit to see what I'm talking about.  The typical pro-guilty argument is that "Jay's story is pretty much true, despite him lying about details.  No new assumptions.  You're side involves police conspiracies and all these people lying and Jay and Jenn implicating themselves for no reason"...and so on. 

If you didnt do this, then I applaud you!  Good on Ya mate! But frankly, that's wholly pedestrian to my point.

I'm not sure why you are taking what I'm saying as an attack on you personally?  I do apologize for assuming that you were mischaracterizing my argument on purpose.  I should have assumed good faith.  In fact you just ... misunderstood it? --fair enough.  Perhaps the snark I read in the paragraph from which I quoted from above was just in my head while reading it. 

-----


I hope that this now makes it more clear.  Occam's razor = Very unreliable outside of a classroom setting or as a secondary explanation for something you already know the correct answer to ahead of time.  It's fundamentally flawed when real world situations with all their real world uncertainties come into play.  Thats my point that I've learned throughout this entire Serial experience.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on July 14, 2015, 07:54:16 AM
So if you killed your girlfriend and you then enlisted the help of Jay to bury her and hide the car.  Then you hear one night that the police have taken Jay in and are questioning him, would you go quietly to sleep that night?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lol the 1/99 Truthers on reddit would say that it's all part of his master plan to lie and trick everyone--he probably just PRETENDED he was asleep to throw us off 15 years down the line!

Reply1: He's one sick bastard...

Reply2: How are all you idiots still convinced he's innocent?  It's plain right in front of you!

Reply3: He lied to Stephanie too by not saying how freaked out he was--lies lies lies...
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 14, 2015, 10:52:22 AM
It is good that Adnan seems to be in that minority who will not confess under police interrogation. If he had, the whole case would be in an underwater position.

There are many similar cases with no real evidence beyond a confession. Two where they were basically the same age were Peter Reilly and Martin Tankleff. There are plenty of other cases where they were close and this includes Amanda Knox and the Norfolk Four.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 20, 2015, 07:27:34 PM
So this week was about bail.  They did answer some questions about Mr. S.  But I think they were a bit overly suspicious of him.  For example, the idea of going home to get a plane.  I can totally see that happening.  The bit about how he had to cross the road with his car and stop to go pee seems suspicious.

Mr. S was the guy who discovered the body of Hae.  His story is that he was driving west on Franklin road on his way back to work and he had to stop because he needed to pee very badly.  Instead of just pulling over to the south side of the road and stopping, he (for whatever reason) stopped and pulled over on the NORTH side of the road to pee.  This makes no sense since it will take you quite a bit longer to do this.

Next week, they're going to talk about Cell tower data.  I don't think it's as accurate as police seem to think it is.  For example, I don't think that phones ALWAYS connect to the closest tower, thus you may think a person is in one area by the fact that the phone connected to a particular tower, but in fact the person could be in a totally different area.

ETA: and as I'm googling this, look what I find:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/experts-say-law-enforcements-use-of-cellphone-records-can-be-inaccurate/2014/06/27/028be93c-faf3-11e3-932c-0a55b81f48ce_story.html

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 21, 2015, 11:48:03 AM
I am not sure that I take apart Mr S's testimony the same way you do however it does still seem pretty particular and I do think he may knew a lot which was not told.

I think it is also very interesting just how many bodies got dumped in the park. I have a local park I often walk my dog. As far as I know, there has never been any bodies dumped there.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 21, 2015, 11:52:24 AM
I am not sure that I take apart Mr S's testimony the same way you do however it does still seem pretty particular and I do think he may knew a lot which was not told.

I think it is also very interesting just how many bodies got dumped in the park. I have a local park I often walk my dog. As far as I know, there has never been any bodies dumped there.

This week's episode has more.  Which part don't you agree with?  I find it extremely weird that if you're traveling EAST (I said west in the previous post) on the road and you have to pee.  There are woods on either side of the road.  You don't just pull off to the right and go pee on the south side of the road, but INSTEAD you pull your car over to the opposite side of the road and walk off into the woods on the NORTH side to go pee. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 21, 2015, 12:00:44 PM
If he went home, I believe he most likely went home to drink a beer and then wanted to lie. I can accept that actually.
I guess my issue is that this is a city and if I was driving, I would not pull over into the woods period. Instead, I would find a convenience store (any with gas pumps has to provide a bathroom from what I understand) or wait 10 minutes. It likely took him a few minutes just to walk to that spot.
As such, I agree that it is unlikely that he would go into the woods just I think it is unlikely for different reasons.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 21, 2015, 12:59:47 PM
If he went home, I believe he most likely went home to drink a beer and then wanted to lie. I can accept that actually.
I guess my issue is that this is a city and if I was driving, I would not pull over into the woods period. Instead, I would find a convenience store (any with gas pumps has to provide a bathroom from what I understand) or wait 10 minutes. It likely took him a few minutes just to walk to that spot.
As such, I agree that it is unlikely that he would go into the woods just I think it is unlikely for different reasons.

Yes, but I'm talking specifically about the idea of crossing the road.  Assume that you did decide to pull over to pee in the woods, how would you do it?  Would you cross the road or would you stay on the same side of the road?  Go look at the google street view of the road.  There's no reason to cross the road.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 21, 2015, 01:51:36 PM
If he went home, I believe he most likely went home to drink a beer and then wanted to lie. I can accept that actually.
I guess my issue is that this is a city and if I was driving, I would not pull over into the woods period. Instead, I would find a convenience store (any with gas pumps has to provide a bathroom from what I understand) or wait 10 minutes. It likely took him a few minutes just to walk to that spot.
As such, I agree that it is unlikely that he would go into the woods just I think it is unlikely for different reasons.

Yes, but I'm talking specifically about the idea of crossing the road.  Assume that you did decide to pull over to pee in the woods, how would you do it?  Would you cross the road or would you stay on the same side of the road?  Go look at the google street view of the road.  There's no reason to cross the road.

Can you link me to a street view since you have looked at it?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on July 21, 2015, 02:46:38 PM
Why did the flasher cross the road?



Anyway.  They kinda crossed a line for me in this episode.  It seemed like a great deal of speculation of the sort that got Adanan into the slammer.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 21, 2015, 03:50:07 PM
I agree pants. There was a lot of speculation about Mr. S.

I'll see about a link when I get home.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 21, 2015, 04:06:42 PM
I agree pants. There was a lot of speculation about Mr. S.

I'll see about a link when I get home.

I understand. . . .If I was asked about "Indian River Park", I could argue but not knowing exactly where the various locations, I would be guessing to some extent.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 21, 2015, 04:42:08 PM
If he went home, I believe he most likely went home to drink a beer and then wanted to lie. I can accept that actually.
I guess my issue is that this is a city and if I was driving, I would not pull over into the woods period. Instead, I would find a convenience store (any with gas pumps has to provide a bathroom from what I understand) or wait 10 minutes. It likely took him a few minutes just to walk to that spot.
As such, I agree that it is unlikely that he would go into the woods just I think it is unlikely for different reasons.

Yes, but I'm talking specifically about the idea of crossing the road.  Assume that you did decide to pull over to pee in the woods, how would you do it?  Would you cross the road or would you stay on the same side of the road?  Go look at the google street view of the road.  There's no reason to cross the road.

Playing devil's advocate seems to be my job in this thread; other possibilities include

-pulling to the left side might have avoided some small obstacle
-he might have been to that area of the park before, and liked it (for whatever purposes he was going there, which may have been pissing, drinking, drug use, or masturbating for all we know)
-he might often go to different parts of the woods to do (whatever that thing is), and this was a part he had not yet been to
-he might have stumbled upon the body at a previous time, and finally decided to report it
-he might have had something to do with Hae's death, thus knew the location and decided to report it

Lots and lots of plausible possibilities.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 21, 2015, 04:50:57 PM
If he went home, I believe he most likely went home to drink a beer and then wanted to lie. I can accept that actually.
I guess my issue is that this is a city and if I was driving, I would not pull over into the woods period. Instead, I would find a convenience store (any with gas pumps has to provide a bathroom from what I understand) or wait 10 minutes. It likely took him a few minutes just to walk to that spot.
As such, I agree that it is unlikely that he would go into the woods just I think it is unlikely for different reasons.

Yes, but I'm talking specifically about the idea of crossing the road.  Assume that you did decide to pull over to pee in the woods, how would you do it?  Would you cross the road or would you stay on the same side of the road?  Go look at the google street view of the road.  There's no reason to cross the road.

Playing devil's advocate seems to be my job in this thread; other possibilities include

-pulling to the left side might have avoided some small obstacle
-he might have been to that area of the park before, and liked it (for whatever purposes he was going there, which may have been pissing, drinking, drug use, or masturbating for all we know)
-he might often go to different parts of the woods to do (whatever that thing is), and this was a part he had not yet been to
-he might have stumbled upon the body at a previous time, and finally decided to report it
-he might have had something to do with Hae's death, thus knew the location and decided to report it

Lots and lots of plausible possibilities.

I think I mostly agree with you here and I only wish that he had been pressed a bit more and investigated more deeply in case he had more involvement in the murder of Hae. Not actually saying he is guilty but I think he should have been much more of a "person of interest."
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 21, 2015, 04:57:33 PM
I think I mostly agree with you here and I only wish that he had been pressed a bit more and investigated more deeply in case he had more involvement in the murder of Hae. Not actually saying he is guilty but I think he should have been much more of a "person of interest."

Yeah, totally agree there.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 21, 2015, 08:22:27 PM
I'm not suggesting that he is the murderer. 

You forgot the following possibility. 

-Saw a unicorn farting a rainbow. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 21, 2015, 08:23:13 PM
If I recall Serial correctly, isn't this guy the streaker?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Jeremy's Sea on July 22, 2015, 01:53:50 PM

-Saw a unicorn farting a rainbow. 

That's your explanation for everything!  :D
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 22, 2015, 05:20:59 PM
I'm not suggesting that he is the murderer. 

You forgot the following possibility. 

-Saw a unicorn farting a rainbow. 

I was replying specifically to this:

Yes, but I'm talking specifically about the idea of crossing the road.  Assume that you did decide to pull over to pee in the woods, how would you do it?  Would you cross the road or would you stay on the same side of the road?  Go look at the google street view of the road.  There's no reason to cross the road.

If there are plenty of plausible reasons for him to cross the road, then it makes the fact seem irrelevant. If you cannot think of a reason he might cross the road, it seems more suspicious.

I think Mr. S sounds like a major creepo, and I do wish the police would have investigated him (as well as everything and everyone else related to this case) much more thoroughly.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 22, 2015, 05:33:14 PM
What are you thoughts about the multiple women's bodies found in that park?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 22, 2015, 05:44:29 PM
What are you thoughts about the multiple women's bodies found in that park?

Sounds like a very murdery place.

Do you suspect that the victims are linked?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 22, 2015, 05:55:50 PM
What are you thoughts about the multiple women's bodies found in that park?

Sounds like a very murdery place.

Do you suspect that the victims are linked?

Suspect is too strong a word. . . .Wonder might be a better wording.

There does seem to have been two or more serial killers wandering around Baltimore around that time.
I don't agree with all but makes interesting facts to mull over
https://www.reddit.com/r/serialpodcast/comments/2o9jzj/the_woodlawn_strangler_roundup_of_new_facts_old/
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 25, 2015, 01:34:58 PM
In a hypothetical world where Adnan was found innocent at trial, and the case of Hae's murder was now being discussed, who would be your leading suspects?

Jay and his lies make me believe that he was involved to some extent. It's also possible that he made up EVERYTHING (under pressure from police, or to raise his "bad boy" cred on the street), but at least to me, that seems less likely than there being some nuggets of truth in his lies.

Adnan didn't seem to have a great motive beyond the star-crossed lovers idea, which is hard to buy. Still though, there was the issue of him soliciting a ride from Hae the day of her murder, which at least puts him in the right location to be involved.

The family reported Hae missing fairly quickly, because she would not have shirked her duty of picking up her cousin from daycare. This means that whatever chain of events led to her murder began between her leaving school and not reaching the daycare. I don't think she would have chosen this for any reason--somebody at least initiated the events leading to her death at that time, and I find it more plausible that this was somebody she knew than a stranger.

Don should certainly be considered as a suspect, but I believe he was at work at the time Hae's trip to the daycare would need to be interrupted?

We know Adnan asked for a ride that day, and we know that sometime between leaving school and reaching daycare somebody interrupted her plan, ultimately leading to her murder. Obviously this is not evidence that he killed her, but it's enough for Adnan to remain suspect #1 for me.

I expect others to disagree, but since this is wholly in the realm of conjecture, I'd enjoy hearing why y'all might think another person would be your #1 suspect.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 25, 2015, 01:54:11 PM
The house of one of the serial killers mentioned in the podcast is right across the street from an ATM which Hae might have used. In addition, the case  he was convicted for I believe was a daytime abduction as well. Makes him a pretty strong suspect.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 25, 2015, 02:02:12 PM
The house of one of the serial killers mentioned in the podcast is right across the street from an ATM which Hae might have used. In addition, the case  he was convicted for I believe was a daytime abduction as well. Makes him a pretty strong suspect.

Was there a transaction from Hae's card at that machine on that day? Was the ATM between school and the daycare?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on July 25, 2015, 02:18:13 PM
Actually Don't alibi was never corroborated. Presumably the police would have been able to check if Don had clocked into work but there are no records indicating that they did so and that evidence is now long gone.

I don't really have a #1 suspect. I think the cops cocked up the job so well that we don't really get to have a suspect now unless by some insane stroke of luck somebody's DNA turns up somewhere it shouldn't.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 25, 2015, 02:47:02 PM
Actually Don't alibi was never corroborated. Presumably the police would have been able to check if Don had clocked into work but there are no records indicating that they did so and that evidence is now long gone.

I don't really have a #1 suspect. I think the cops cocked up the job so well that we don't really get to have a suspect now unless by some insane stroke of luck somebody's DNA turns up somewhere it shouldn't.

Yeah, can't really disagree about the cops cocking the whole thing up.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 25, 2015, 02:48:06 PM
The house of one of the serial killers mentioned in the podcast is right across the street from an ATM which Hae might have used. In addition, the case  he was convicted for I believe was a daytime abduction as well. Makes him a pretty strong suspect.

Was there a transaction from Hae's card at that machine on that day? Was the ATM between school and the daycare?

She had a paycheck that had never been deposited in her bank. There are no longer records if she cashed it however. My understanding is that the ATM is on one of her routes between the school and the day care.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 25, 2015, 03:21:26 PM
The house of one of the serial killers mentioned in the podcast is right across the street from an ATM which Hae might have used. In addition, the case  he was convicted for I believe was a daytime abduction as well. Makes him a pretty strong suspect.

Was there a transaction from Hae's card at that machine on that day? Was the ATM between school and the daycare?

She had a paycheck that had never been deposited in her bank. There are no longer records if she cashed it however. My understanding is that the ATM is on one of her routes between the school and the day care.

That would require the killer to assault Hae, and somehow incapacitate her enough for him to driver her car away. This seems less likely (to me) than somebody that Hae trusts getting in the car with her--but your scenario is certainly possible.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 25, 2015, 03:26:38 PM
The house of one of the serial killers mentioned in the podcast is right across the street from an ATM which Hae might have used. In addition, the case  he was convicted for I believe was a daytime abduction as well. Makes him a pretty strong suspect.

Was there a transaction from Hae's card at that machine on that day? Was the ATM between school and the daycare?

She had a paycheck that had never been deposited in her bank. There are no longer records if she cashed it however. My understanding is that the ATM is on one of her routes between the school and the day care.

That would require the killer to assault Hae, and somehow incapacitate her enough for him to driver her car away. This seems less likely (to me) than somebody that Hae trusts getting in the car with her--but your scenario is certainly possible.

I am working from memory, you need to understand. Still, my memory is that he did basically exactly the same thing in the past.
My argument is not that this is definitely what happened but it is just as plausible as Adnan committing the crime.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 25, 2015, 03:45:20 PM
Sure, I won't argue there, since we're working with basically no evidence.

I think Adnan killing her is more likely than her stumbling on a serial killer, but you're not wrong to think the opposite.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 25, 2015, 04:09:08 PM
Sure, I won't argue there, since we're working with basically no evidence.

That is the main issue still. . . . .Maybe Adnan did murder her but there is no evidence which I give any value to.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 25, 2015, 04:36:41 PM
I think that it's highly unlikely that he did since he was at track practice during the time of the murder.  His coach's testimony verifies this


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on July 25, 2015, 05:11:28 PM
Adnan didn't seem to have a great motive beyond the star-crossed lovers idea, which is hard to buy. Still though, there was the issue of him soliciting a ride from Hae the day of her murder, which at least puts him in the right location to be involved.

I don't think we do know that.  There is some evidence that the witness that claimed she gave him a ride had her day wrong, and other witnesses that saw him elsewhere.

Sure, I won't argue there, since we're working with basically no evidence.

I think Adnan killing her is more likely than her stumbling on a serial killer, but you're not wrong to think the opposite.

That is the lottery fallacy right there.  The idea that the chances of you winning the lottery (or getting killed by a serial killer) are so slim that therefore no-one wins (or gets murdered).  And its wrong to draw conclusions based on such probabilities.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 25, 2015, 06:14:52 PM
Sure, I won't argue there, since we're working with basically no evidence.

That is the main issue still. . . . .Maybe Adnan did murder her but there is no evidence which I give any value to.

Agreed.

I think that it's highly unlikely that he did since he was at track practice during the time of the murder.  His coach's testimony verifies this

Didn't the coach say at first (talked about on Serial) that he didn't remember? That sometimes kids weren't there, and he didn't really keep track of who missed or when?

Adnan didn't seem to have a great motive beyond the star-crossed lovers idea, which is hard to buy. Still though, there was the issue of him soliciting a ride from Hae the day of her murder, which at least puts him in the right location to be involved.

I don't think we do know that.  There is some evidence that the witness that claimed she gave him a ride had her day wrong, and other witnesses that saw him elsewhere.

All I'm saying is that Adnan for sure had opportunity: being in the same place at the same time. We can't say that about any of the other suspects.

Quote
Sure, I won't argue there, since we're working with basically no evidence.

I think Adnan killing her is more likely than her stumbling on a serial killer, but you're not wrong to think the opposite.

That is the lottery fallacy right there.  The idea that the chances of you winning the lottery (or getting killed by a serial killer) are so slim that therefore no-one wins (or gets murdered).  And its wrong to draw conclusions based on such probabilities.

Buh? The lottery fallacy is me having a different conjecture-based conclusion than you?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 25, 2015, 06:24:18 PM
You understand that "ride" means something very different than suggested initially?

There is quite a bit of distance between the school and the track field, so it means a quick drop off at the track field. Going over BVest Buys is quite a distance in comparison.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 25, 2015, 10:43:43 PM
The coach testified that he had a long talk about Ramadan during practice with Adnan and that it was a warm day in January.  In Undisclosed, they check all of the January dates that had track practice.  The only one that was warm was the day in question.  Basically the coach could not pin a date on it, but by some good attorney and investigative work, the only day it could have happened was the date of Hae's murder.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 26, 2015, 12:54:04 AM
The coach testified that he had a long talk about Ramadan during practice with Adnan and that it was a warm day in January.  In Undisclosed, they check all of the January dates that had track practice.  The only one that was warm was the day in question.  Basically the coach could not pin a date on it, but by some good attorney and investigative work, the only day it could have happened was the date of Hae's murder.

So, it's true that the coach couldn't remember if Adnan was there?

Obviously that isn't evidence against him, but it's a far stretch to call it evidence in his favor.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 26, 2015, 09:01:27 AM
The coach testified that he had a long talk about Ramadan during practice with Adnan and that it was a warm day in January.  In Undisclosed, they check all of the January dates that had track practice.  The only one that was warm was the day in question.  Basically the coach could not pin a date on it, but by some good attorney and investigative work, the only day it could have happened was the date of Hae's murder.

So, it's true that the coach couldn't remember if Adnan was there?

Obviously that isn't evidence against him, but it's a far stretch to call it evidence in his favor.

Jesus, I give up.

He has a distinct memory of a specific conversation on a day that was warm.  The ONLY day that could have happened was the date of the murder. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 26, 2015, 09:10:54 AM
Jesus, I give up.

He has a distinct memory of a specific conversation on a day that was warm.  The ONLY day that could have happened was the date of the murder.

Now, it could be a false memory or several memories merging together but there is no evidence that is the case. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on July 26, 2015, 11:32:41 AM
What is more, one of the wotnesses who said she heard Adanan ask Hae for a rode said it took place on the day of her interview with the local news station, which, as it turns out, was not the day of her murder.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 26, 2015, 11:45:07 AM
(click to show/hide)

Jesus, I give up.

He has a distinct memory of a specific conversation on a day that was warm.  The ONLY day that could have happened was the date of the murder.

I didn't know that--if it was brought up on Undisclosed, I didn't listen to that one. That's definitely a point for Adnan, though (as Mr. Fox pointed out), we all know the fallibility of memory. I'm not ready to say "Adnan could not have done it," but that's still an important piece of info.

What is more, one of the wotnesses who said she heard Adanan ask Hae for a rode said it took place on the day of her interview with the local news station, which, as it turns out, was not the day of her murder.

I've also not heard this, thanks. Same as above: it's not proof he's innocent, but it chips away at the small amount of circumstantial evidence that makes me suspicious of him.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on July 26, 2015, 01:35:03 PM
So why does the fallability of memory only apply to exculpatory evidence?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 26, 2015, 02:14:56 PM
So why does the fallability of memory only apply to exculpatory evidence?

Well, in this case, the ONLY evidence that we have that Adnan wasn't at practice on the day of the murder is?  Surprise Surprise Surprise, the testimony of Jay!

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 26, 2015, 02:29:45 PM
So why does the fallability of memory only apply to exculpatory evidence?

Well, in this case, the ONLY evidence that we have that Adnan wasn't at practice on the day of the murder is?  Surprise Surprise Surprise, the testimony of Jay!

Is there any question that Jay would not be perfectly willing to sell somebody downriver if it is to his advantage?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on July 26, 2015, 03:24:48 PM
So why does the fallability of memory only apply to exculpatory evidence?

Well, in this case, the ONLY evidence that we have that Adnan wasn't at practice on the day of the murder is?  Surprise Surprise Surprise, the testimony of Jay!

Exactly.  Everyone has perfect memory when it puts Adanan in jail, but those who defy that narrative are treated like they are fallable.  Which is a nasty double standard.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 26, 2015, 03:59:34 PM
Exactly.  Everyone has perfect memory when it puts Adanan in jail, but those who defy that narrative are treated like they are fallable.  Which is a nasty double standard.

You see that in a lot of court cases where they take eye witness testimony or expert testimony of guilt as infallible for guilt and dismiss experts or witnesses for the defense.   
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 26, 2015, 04:14:01 PM
I wanted to be absolutely certain so I asked the Undisclosed folks.  Here's the reply:

https://twitter.com/EvidenceProf/status/625395240036401152

Quote
@SkepticalBelg @Undisclosedpod Jay said that Adnan was at track practice. He's the only one who says Adnan was late to practice.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 26, 2015, 04:36:38 PM
I found this
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9Er3i6TPIj0/VD7qY96JAFI/AAAAAAAABb0/fwWyHcSu6Gc/s1600/Leakin%2BPark%2BBodies%2BJune%2B2011%2Bjpg.jpg)

http://chamspage.blogspot.com/2010/11/the-bodies-of-leakin-park-baltimore-md.html

According to it, 68 bodies have been found in the park since 1946.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 27, 2015, 05:22:15 PM
I wanted to be absolutely certain so I asked the Undisclosed folks.  Here's the reply:

https://twitter.com/EvidenceProf/status/625395240036401152

Quote
@SkepticalBelg @Undisclosedpod Jay said that Adnan was at track practice. He's the only one who says Adnan was late to practice.

So Jay's story is the evidence that he was at track?

 

I think maybe you're reading too much into my posts, so let me sum up:

I don't think there is ANY meaningful evidence (I don't count Jay's testimony as meaningful, but it does count as evidence) against Adnan. He should not have been convicted.

Based on conjecture alone, Adnan would be my personal choice for "prime suspect." Discussing who our prime suspects are and why is (I think) fun, but anybody would be remiss to be sure of anything involving this case.

I have chimed in a couple times when I thought I saw people committing some errors in Adnan's defense, in a "devil's advocate" role since the vast majority of posters here seem to fall in the "Adnan is probably innocent" camp. I'd have totally taken that tack instead had the majority been saying that "Adnan is probably guilty."

We know so little, I think it would be an error to pronounce Adnan even "probably" guilty or innocent.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on July 27, 2015, 08:54:55 PM
I think the issue with accusing Adnan at all at this point is that the police so obviously narrowed in on him to the exclusion of all other suspects and the case that they finally decided to put against him is so clumsy in retrospect (and, I should add, racist) that it's hard to see him as any more likely to have committed the murder than virtually anyone else in the area. At all points I think you have to ask yourself why the prosecution didn't go with any of the alternative theories you've proposed, and at this point I think one has to conclude that the actual case put against Adnan, as bad as it is, really was the best case they had against him.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 27, 2015, 09:10:05 PM
Yeah, I agree Mr. Slick... the police work was god-awful. We're really left with no evidence of any kind.

For all us conjecturistas with interest in Serial, it's probably going to come down going with your gut on whether or not there was even a shred of truth to Jay's story. I find it plausible that he was fed the whole thing under pressure from police, and I find it plausible that he covered being more involved by inventing a BS story that the police didn't bother to vet. My gut pushes me toward the latter, and of course there are plenty of other possibilities too.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 28, 2015, 04:19:42 AM
Just finished listening to the cell phone data episode. . . .The cell phone data does not indicate innocence but it is more a case where it is just basically trash. There is basically no way of knowing which tower one might connect to at any given time.

On a side note, I really do not like the Daubert standard and I consider Frye standard far better. I do not like that a judge, who may have no real expertize in the requisite field, be allowed to approve new and experimental science.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 28, 2015, 07:50:00 AM
I was just about to post the same.   Of note, the cell phone expert testified to 4 pings only and 3 of the four had data which disagreed with what Jay said.  And interestingly enough AT&T said that they should never ever use the tower information for incoming calls to indicate location, yet they did anyway.   


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 28, 2015, 10:26:08 AM
I was just about to post the same.   Of note, the cell phone expert testified to 4 pings only and 3 of the four had data which disagreed with what Jay said.  And interestingly enough AT&T said that they should never ever use the tower information for incoming calls to indicate location, yet they did anyway.   

With the Russ Faria case, cell phone pings (as well as convenience store receipts) are used to argue innocence but an important difference is that we are dealing with distances of 20 miles or more, not just a few miles. All of the cell phones towers in Adnan's case are within just a few miles.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on July 28, 2015, 02:01:28 PM
I believe that cell phone data is transmitted differently now than it used to be. One specific point is that if memory serves your cell now pings *all* towers in the area rather than just sitting on the closest one so that handshakes between one tower and the next can go much more smoothly. My experience too is that modern cell phones are also pretty good at figuring out exactly where you are. If memory serves, your cell phone "GPS" is actually determined by triangulating your position between the cell towers in the area, whose own coordinates have in turn been confirmed by global satellite. In practice, this works really well; rarely does my phone ever state that I'm more than 30 yards further away than I actually am.

Again, though, that's not the way an analog device would have worked back in the late 90s. Your phone basically hooked up with whatever tower it could find and you went with that. Often that was the nearest one but often it was not. And then if memory serves you just kind of stayed on that one cell until the signal got so weak that you had to hop on to the next one, an action which often created disconnects. I feel like that cell tech is something in particular that it's very easy to get the wrong idea about when looking at it with 2015 eyes.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 28, 2015, 03:11:25 PM
I have seen my cell phone's GPS go wonky in Gloucester Virginia area but it is a relatively rural there and far few cell phone towers. Once I start moving however, it seems able to figure out where I am.

When I am in any slightly more urban area however, the signal usually will triangulate my location more like within a couple of meters however (yes, that closely).

On Adnan though, that is something that bears remembering. Cell phones were still analog at that time and I do not believe that I got my first cell phone until sometime after 2001.  At that time, it was also a "pay as you go" phone.

I am curious, what are thoughts on Adnan not saying anything incriminating during his interrogation? It is actually pretty amazing to me that he did not.  I have to be honest, I probably would have broken even if innocent.  I think if he was guilty, he would have tried to pin it on Jay.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on July 28, 2015, 03:33:53 PM
So cell phone tower data is the 'A' part of 'A-GPS'.  Essentially this is used to get the general area of the cell phone.  This is then sent to the GPS unit to more quickly get a precise position.   Essentially if you've ever looked at the map, the huge giant circle is cell tower positioning.  As it quickly shrinks that's the GPS getting your position.   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 29, 2015, 08:42:54 AM
I was listening to the Generation Why podcast and on some cases they don't seem to do very well. . . . .Amanda Knox is a good case of that. Another was when they discussed the Bermuda Triangle. They discussed from a semi-skeptical angle but just had issues.

They make a claim however in this cases that Hae, in her diary, claimed to be afraid of Adnan and that he was stalking her. In addition, there is the claim that she hid in classed from Adnan.

Does anybody know what is the situation in regard to this?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 30, 2015, 05:44:44 PM
I was listening to the Generation Why podcast and on some cases they don't seem to do very well. . . . .Amanda Knox is a good case of that. Another was when they discussed the Bermuda Triangle. They discussed from a semi-skeptical angle but just had issues.

They make a claim however in this cases that Hae, in her diary, claimed to be afraid of Adnan and that he was stalking her. In addition, there is the claim that she hid in classed from Adnan.

Does anybody know what is the situation in regard to this?

A diary entry would be interesting, though tough to count as evidence as described by this law blogger (http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/2014/11/today-my-colleagueclaire-rajtold-me-about-theserial-podcast-according-to-itunesserialis-a-new-podcast-from-the-creators-of.html). (fixed)

I think this was on serial, the only diary entry I've heard:

Quote
I like him. No, I love him. It's just all the things that stand in the middle, his religion and Muslim customs all are in the way. It irks me to know that I am against his religion. He called me a devil a few times. I knew he was only joking, but it's somewhat true. I hate that. It's like making him choose between me and his religion.

Meh. She thought that his religion was one of the wedges that broke them apart... not surprising, not evidence, but useful to a crappy prosecution's case that used Adnan's religion against him.

I'd pretty skeptical that Koenig would leave out something as inflammatory as Hae writing that she's afraid of Adnan.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 30, 2015, 05:50:19 PM
Your link is broken and does not seem to go anyway

I do realize that diaries and the like are tough to use as evidence, for example this case
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Kent_Leppink
Leppink wrote a letter to his parents that said Linehan, Carlin, or Scott Hilke were "probably" responsible if he died under "suspicious circumstances".

Would still be interested in reading your law blogger however.

I have another issue with the prosecution however related to Best Buys and just makes no sense -
Does the Best Buys make any sense with regard to any destination which Adnan might be going to? Where might he be asking her to drive him that might put the Best Buys on route.

Second, assuming that it was on route somewhere, why would she have pulled into that parking lot and pulled into the back area. The clock was ticking with her knowing that she needed to pick up her young relative at daycare.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 30, 2015, 05:52:47 PM
Your link is broken and does not seem to go anyway

I do realize that diaries and the like are tough to use as evidence, for example this case
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Kent_Leppink
Leppink wrote a letter to his parents that said Linehan, Carlin, or Scott Hilke were "probably" responsible if he died under "suspicious circumstances".

Would still be interested in reading your law blogger however

Fixed!
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 30, 2015, 05:53:56 PM
Your link is broken and does not seem to go anyway

I do realize that diaries and the like are tough to use as evidence, for example this case
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Kent_Leppink
Leppink wrote a letter to his parents that said Linehan, Carlin, or Scott Hilke were "probably" responsible if he died under "suspicious circumstances".

Would still be interested in reading your law blogger however

Fixed!

You realize he is one of those involved in Undisclosed?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 30, 2015, 05:59:18 PM
Your link is broken and does not seem to go anyway

I do realize that diaries and the like are tough to use as evidence, for example this case
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Kent_Leppink
Leppink wrote a letter to his parents that said Linehan, Carlin, or Scott Hilke were "probably" responsible if he died under "suspicious circumstances".

Would still be interested in reading your law blogger however

Fixed!

You realize he is one of those involved in Undisclosed?

I did not!

I have nothing against Undisclosed, just a disinterest in the podcast due to the amount of conjecture and the lack of new evidence. I enjoyed that author's explanation of why diaries are generally inadmissible in the relevant context, though.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on July 30, 2015, 06:03:42 PM
I also did not expect you to answer so quick. . . . What are you thoughts on what I brought up with Best Buys?

I have another issue with the prosecution however related to Best Buys and just makes no sense -
Does the Best Buys make any sense with regard to any destination which Adnan might be going to? Where might he be asking her to drive him that might put the Best Buys on route.

Second, assuming that it was on route somewhere, why would she have pulled into that parking lot and pulled into the back area. The clock was ticking with her knowing that she needed to pick up her young relative at daycare.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on July 30, 2015, 06:26:12 PM
I also did not expect you to answer so quick. . . . What are you thoughts on what I brought up with Best Buys?

I have another issue with the prosecution however related to Best Buys and just makes no sense -
Does the Best Buys make any sense with regard to any destination which Adnan might be going to? Where might he be asking her to drive him that might put the Best Buys on route.

Second, assuming that it was on route somewhere, why would she have pulled into that parking lot and pulled into the back area. The clock was ticking with her knowing that she needed to pick up her young relative at daycare.


It's another way in which the state's timeline doesn't make sense, but I already thought that. I think everybody here agrees that it didn't happen the way it was laid out in court. Maybe there're some truth grains in Jay's stories, maybe he made it all up, maybe he was fed everything by the police; I doubt we'll ever know.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on August 02, 2015, 07:53:49 PM
I don't know if anyone has linked this yet.

http://www.msnbc.com/shift/watch/the-docket-398676035940

It's a MSNBC show with two of the Undisclosed podcasters plus a cell phone expert (he is a stereotypical nerdy engineer)

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 03, 2015, 02:42:23 PM
Pretty good program and more nails in the coffin of the prosecution case . .  . .Glad to see that the whole timeline thing bothered the host as well.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 08, 2015, 09:03:34 AM
Some thoughts about Hae's car.
I used this map
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=zERAsrjje-sU.kQFffQE6h2vk

Based on it, the car was within approximately 8200 feet  of where Hae's body was located and within 5100 feet of where Patrick lived.
If I lived around that area, I very well might walk that whole basic area walking my dog. Makes it quite plausible where the police could have found the car quickly (less than two miles from the body) and Jay could have found the car (a few blocks from Patrick's house.)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on August 08, 2015, 12:50:02 PM
Some thoughts about Hae's car.
I used this map
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=zERAsrjje-sU.kQFffQE6h2vk

Based on it, the car was within approximately 8200 feet  of where Hae's body was located and within 5100 feet of where Patrick lived.
If I lived around that area, I very well might walk that whole basic area walking my dog. Makes it quite plausible where the police could have found the car quickly (less than two miles from the body) and Jay could have found the car (a few blocks from Patrick's house.)

I didn't realize how close that was.  That would be just about the FIRST place I would look for her car if I found her body there.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 08, 2015, 02:41:11 PM
Everything involved in this crime is within a couple of miles of everything else. Simply doing a street by street search would find the car within a few hours. Interestedly, it is not where Jay said it was. It is pretty close (which is also pretty close to where the body was found) and just doing a bit of searching from where Jay said it might have been would have good odds of finding it quickly.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 10, 2015, 11:27:23 AM
Just listed to the next "Serial Dynasty" and the host took on a person who believed that Adnan is guilty.
While I have a slightly different position on Jay with me thinking that it is very possible that he is not involved at all, I think he does a really good job and I think her position is actually pretty vapid. In many cases she does not know things and makes some pretty severe mistakes.

http://serialdynasty.podomatic.com/entry/2015-08-09T10_21_18-07_00

One issue that I think is accidentally brought out is that the story Jay seems to talk about makes it look like Jay and Adnan are in the same car when they really should be in separate cars. 

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 11, 2015, 01:46:39 PM
I know I have been posting a lot but one issue which has always plagued us is that there is some kind of conspiracy with the Baltimore police.

One really needs to listen to the latest episode of Undisclosed. It seems like there is a pattern of systematic corruption with the Baltimore investigators. I have listened to this podcast three times and even researched a couple of cases on the news media to verify.

This really just seems to be the way they work.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on August 11, 2015, 08:40:49 PM
I have a bit more mundane explanation.  It's basically a combination of severe confirmation bias and just plain shoddy police work.  Once I get a chance I will post more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 12, 2015, 02:52:19 PM
I want to be clear, I am not arguing any kind of grand conspiracy. What I am more arguing is that they are perfectly willing to cut corners and then not willing to admit their mistakes. That might be because of confirmation bias but I think there is also simply that they do not care. They closed a case and that is the end of things.

What I think the last show does indicate that this is an ongoing pattern and not just with Adnan.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on August 23, 2015, 02:47:55 PM
So in listening to Serial Dynasty which came out today there was an interesting tidbit that I have never heard before:


The Linkin Park 'pings' were supposedly calls from Jenn to Adnan's phone.  When Jenn testified in court, she said very clearly that the phone calls were answered by 'an older man with a deep voice who said that Jay was busy'

Now, with that being said, WHY don't we know who this older man with the deep voice was?  Remember Adnan was a 17 year old at the time.  Hearing him speak on Serial, there's no way he had a deep voice at 17.  Who was this guy and why don't we know about him?

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on August 23, 2015, 08:42:10 PM
So in listening to Serial Dynasty which came out today there was an interesting tidbit that I have never heard before:


The Linkin Park 'pings' were supposedly calls from Jenn to Adnan's phone.  When Jenn testified in court, she said very clearly that the phone calls were answered by 'an older man with a deep voice who said that Jay was busy'

Now, with that being said, WHY don't we know who this older man with the deep voice was?  Remember Adnan was a 17 year old at the time.  Hearing him speak on Serial, there's no way he had a deep voice at 17.  Who was this guy and why don't we know about him?

I think it involves too many assumptions to be meaningful.

Jenn testified that the voice was deep; her months-old memory of the voice was deep. (and we have to assume that her memory of "deep" is deeper than Adnan is capable of producing) I mean, right there, that's enough for it to be thrown out the window.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on August 23, 2015, 09:39:34 PM
You mean like when she says it was not Adnan and it was not jay?  Or are you saying it could be Adnan?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 23, 2015, 11:12:41 PM
I think it involves too many assumptions to be meaningful.

Jenn testified that the voice was deep; her months-old memory of the voice was deep. (and we have to assume that her memory of "deep" is deeper than Adnan is capable of producing) I mean, right there, that's enough for it to be thrown out the window.

I use this to argue that I think we can discard Jenn's testimony
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on August 24, 2015, 12:09:56 PM
You mean like when she says it was not Adnan and it was not jay?  Or are you saying it could be Adnan?

Yes, exactly. We know how fallible memory is, Jenn's months-old memory of a voice on the phone is pretty shoddy. "It sounded like (person she knows)" would be stronger, but circumstantial at best. "It didn't sound like (person she knows)" is extra crappy because there are MANY plausible reasons she might think that, and be incorrect.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on August 24, 2015, 12:23:32 PM
Jesus.  Never ever ever serve on a jury


Oh. Here you go. 

http://cjbrownlawcom.c.presscdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Supp.-to-Mot.-to-Reopen-FINAL.pdf


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on August 24, 2015, 12:40:52 PM
Jesus.  Never ever ever serve on a jury
Quote

Why, because I can recognize "evidence" as "not evidence?"

What part of my previous post do you disagree with?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on August 24, 2015, 12:57:08 PM
Only two conclusions can be drawn from the statement. 

1) There was another conspirator and the prosecutor is derelict in his duties for not prosecuting

2) she's misremembering

In either case, her testimony is totally unreliable. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 24, 2015, 02:26:18 PM
This was posted on another forum (http://injusticeanywhereforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=151&t=3141&start=200) and ties a lot together:

Jen is worthless as a witness for the State just as Jay is now worthless. Jenn was never that valuable in the first place in terms of Adnan. All she did is confirm in a very strange fashion what she claims Jay told her (see below) but is hardly credible and there is no co orboration for what Jay said. The other thing she claimed to have done was help Jay destroy evidence...his clothes...and some or one implement (the story keeps changing). This implicates Jay and Jenn. The Defense would love to have Jenn testify. She would help them. You really need to get the facts from Undisclosed. They did a superlative job on Jen...episode 3, 4 & 7 plus addendum. The defense would simply take their work.

I agree that you would give a better presentation of these facts and make them far more interesting to an audience. But you still need the facts and, right now, Jay and Jenn are both worthless as witnesses for the State.

1. Jen had a pre interview with the police and her lawyer that lasted 2 and 1/2 hours at the Lawyer's house. Her lawyer was a neighbor of one of the Detectives investigating the case. For the first time according to McG he went to a lawyers house to conduct an interview. After the pre interview (which of course was not recorded) they went to the Police Station where she confessed to being an accessory after the fact but was never charged... meaning the police and prosecution have some explaining to to since plea deals are supposed to be disclosed. This is covered in UNDISCLOSED episode 7 and addendum 7. **note the irregularity of Urick providing a lawyer Benaroya for Jay.

2. Jen and Jays stories don't line up. There are many inconsistencies, showing that Jay or she or both are lying. See Undisclosed episode 3 and addendum 3. And these inconsistencies were there before Undisclosed's new information.

3 Jen makes some pretty strange statements. Like she knows Hae was strangled because Nicole told her. Note not Jay but her friend Nicole. And when Haes body is found Jen is at champs (a bar) and says she is surprised that Hae is dead. (So much for Jay telling her). This is in episode 4 Undisclosed.

4. Jay claims he told Jen the day before that Adnan was going to kill Hae. Jen says he told her after the alleged happened (but apparently didn't know anything about strangled). Jen's reaction upon allegedly being told by Jay....worried about her friends birthday party! (not very credible)

5. Then there is the weather which is significant, and the changes in the alleged burying implements. And Jen testifies that she calls the cell and an older man answers the phone...if true this is evidence that there is a third party with Jay during the 7 pm time period. This is huge....And then there is the problem with Jenn's pager....Cathy/aka Kristi, Jenn's best friend, doesn't recognize the number, Jay refers to the person with the pager as a him, and the pager is registered to a male who lives in Ocean City MD, presumably Jenn's cousin. Then there are the criminal records of her involvement with Jay's relatives.

6. There is significant evidence that the police questioned Jay before the official date they say they questioned him, meaning they talked to him before they ever talked to Jay. Sis interview. Neighbor Boy interview. Jay's own statements. Jay admits that the police helped him with inconsistencies with Jenn's story after they spoke to her. UNDISCLOSED episode 7.

7. What was Jay's relationship with Jenn?

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on August 24, 2015, 02:30:39 PM
Only two conclusions can be drawn from the statement. 

1) There was another conspirator and the prosecutor is derelict in his duties for not prosecuting

2) she's misremembering

In either case, her testimony is totally unreliable

Much agreed.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 24, 2015, 02:41:08 PM
Only two conclusions can be drawn from the statement. 

1) There was another conspirator and the prosecutor is derelict in his duties for not prosecuting

2) she's misremembering

In either case, her testimony is totally unreliable

Much agreed.

If you disregard both hers and Jay's testimony (not just legally but personally), what evidence do you have?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on August 24, 2015, 02:42:21 PM
Only two conclusions can be drawn from the statement. 

1) There was another conspirator and the prosecutor is derelict in his duties for not prosecuting

2) she's misremembering

In either case, her testimony is totally unreliable

Much agreed.

If you disregard both hers and Jay's testimony (not just legally but personally), what evidence do you have?

Bupkis.

I thought we were pretty much all in agreement about that, but then we each have our own pet theories based solely on conjecture.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 24, 2015, 03:54:06 PM
I think where we differ is this:
Your position is that you think that it is very likely that Adnan murdered Hae but there really is no case against him.
My position is I don't think (but cannot be certain) that Adnan murdered Hae. Beyond that, it is just guess work on my part.

Correct or incorrect?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on August 24, 2015, 04:08:56 PM
I think where we differ is this:
Your position is that you think that it is very likely that Adnan murdered Hae but there really is no case against him.
My position is I don't think (but cannot be certain) that Adnan murdered Hae. Beyond that, it is just guess work on my part.

Correct or incorrect?

Reworded just a tad:

My position is that I think Adnan probably killed Hae, based on a few conjectural assumptions--but there is really no case against him.

You don't share my conjectural assumptions, and are more agnostic on whether or not Adnan is guilty, but agree there is really no case against him(?)

Belgarath thinks Adnan is probably innocent, based on a few conjectural assumptions, and also thinks that there is really no case against him (?)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 24, 2015, 04:24:49 PM
I think Adnan is probably innocent but I do not have the high degree of certainty that I have some other cases. For example, I would bet my life on the Norfolk Four being innocent.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on August 24, 2015, 04:27:46 PM
I think Adnan is probably innocent but I do not have the high degree of certainty that I have some other cases. For example, I would bet my life on the Norfolk Four being innocent.

That make sense.

I know I'm driving Belg crazy by popping in to wag my finger, but I really don't think of this case much differently than y'all.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 24, 2015, 04:35:27 PM
I think Adnan is probably innocent but I do not have the high degree of certainty that I have some other cases. For example, I would bet my life on the Norfolk Four being innocent.

That make sense.

I know I'm driving Belg crazy by popping in to wag my finger, but I really don't think of this case much differently than y'all.

The funny thing is that it was harder to convict Roy S David III of the murder of Jada Lambert when he already had a serious criminal record (was in prison at the time) and had DNA evidence against him.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on August 24, 2015, 04:39:28 PM
Yeah, the police work (as well as Adnan's defense) was horrifyingly bad in this case.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 24, 2015, 04:45:31 PM
Yeah, the police work (as well as Adnan's defense) was horrifyingly bad in this case.

Since it looks like Adnan's family paid for experts that never were actually contacted, I see it as a classic "Ineffective Assistance of Council." If this case is not an example of this, does the defense attorney have to stagger in drunk and collapse?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 24, 2015, 05:39:17 PM
This is something that should be posted
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/

Adnan's Attorney Files a Supplement to the Motion to Reopen Based Upon Cell Phone Evidence
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on August 24, 2015, 06:43:35 PM
I posted that earlier.  My position is that I believe Adnan is innocent simply because there is NO evidence that points toward his guilt. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on August 24, 2015, 06:46:20 PM
I posted that earlier.  My position is that I believe Adnan is innocent simply because there is NO evidence that points toward his guilt. 

I think that's a totally fair, rational position.

And to be clear, I don't think Adnan is guilty (because I agree there is no evidence suggesting his guilt)--but he's my favorite suspect (for reasons mentioned earlier in the thread).
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 25, 2015, 12:55:46 AM
I wanted to rewrite my previous response. It is not that I wrong anything wrong but wanted to be clear.

I think the logic on the latest version of Undisclosed is pretty solid. Jay was very likely the anonymous tip source and he really knew nothing about the crime.  That is something that strikes me why Adnan is innocent. It really appears as if Jay actually knew nothing of the crime.

It is really pathetic that Jay would sell Adnan to the cops for a few thousand dollars. Doesn't matter if it was for the motorcycle or not. I would not sell somebody I hate in such a manner. 

This also explains how Jay got Jen involved. He likely told her that he needed the money and nobody would actually get hurt. He might have also offered to split the money with her. Still, I think in part it explains how Jen might have become involved.

With many people, one of the arguments with regards to Jay also is the location of the car. Let us assume that he did call in the anonymous tip. He initially did not know where the car was but hoped that with the location of the car, he would be able to use it to show that he knew something of the crime. He actively looked for the car and found it sometime between the anonymous call and when he was first officially interviewed. Tend to consider it most likely towards the end of that time but does not matter much.   
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on August 25, 2015, 12:59:36 PM
It's plausible, for sure.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Crash on August 28, 2015, 02:27:21 PM
I'm new to this thread but I did listen to the whole show as it came out. 
  It is easy to believe Adnan could be lying.  One thing that bothered me and the podcast did not dare bring up  (taboo),  Was there a possible religious motive.  Adnan was muslim and Hae was probably not muslim.  The possible religious conflict was never questioned so I still wondered was there  pressure from Adnans family to defend their "honor".  Depending on how devout his family was, isn't it  frowned upon to be dating an infidel?  The family of Adnan was conspiciously silent for the whole podcast.   
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 28, 2015, 04:14:30 PM
I'm new to this thread but I did listen to the whole show as it came out. 
  It is easy to believe Adnan could be lying.  One thing that bothered me and the podcast did not dare bring up  (taboo),  Was there a possible religious motive.  Adnan was muslim and Hae was probably not muslim.  The possible religious conflict was never questioned so I still wondered was there  pressure from Adnans family to defend their "honor".  Depending on how devout his family was, isn't it  frowned upon to be dating an infidel?  The family of Adnan was conspiciously silent for the whole podcast.

Adnan's brother have been interviewed on Undisclosed. Need to understand that Adnan seems to have been at the time an American teen far less serious about his religion than he is now. He also had a new girlfriend.

Interestingly, the prosecution used exactly what you argue to deny bail.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on August 28, 2015, 04:41:24 PM
I'm new to this thread but I did listen to the whole show as it came out. 
  It is easy to believe Adnan could be lying.  One thing that bothered me and the podcast did not dare bring up  (taboo),  Was there a possible religious motive.  Adnan was muslim and Hae was probably not muslim.  The possible religious conflict was never questioned so I still wondered was there  pressure from Adnans family to defend their "honor".  Depending on how devout his family was, isn't it  frowned upon to be dating an infidel?  The family of Adnan was conspiciously silent for the whole podcast.

Adnan's brother have been interviewed on Undisclosed. Need to understand that Adnan seems to have been at the time an American teen far less serious about his religion than he is now. He also had a new girlfriend.

Interestingly, the prosecution used exactly what you argue to deny bail.

And definitely used it in the trial too, though it was more subtle.  Frankly Adnan wasn't really much of a devout muslim.  He was more like an American Catholic. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on August 28, 2015, 05:00:31 PM
I'm new to this thread but I did listen to the whole show as it came out. 
  It is easy to believe Adnan could be lying.  One thing that bothered me and the podcast did not dare bring up  (taboo),  Was there a possible religious motive.  Adnan was muslim and Hae was probably not muslim.  The possible religious conflict was never questioned so I still wondered was there  pressure from Adnans family to defend their "honor".  Depending on how devout his family was, isn't it  frowned upon to be dating an infidel?  The family of Adnan was conspiciously silent for the whole podcast.

Adnan's brother have been interviewed on Undisclosed. Need to understand that Adnan seems to have been at the time an American teen far less serious about his religion than he is now. He also had a new girlfriend.

Interestingly, the prosecution used exactly what you argue to deny bail.

And definitely used it in the trial too, though it was more subtle.  Frankly Adnan wasn't really much of a devout muslim.  He was more like an American Catholic.

Goes to church, claims the pope is the supreme authority, but uses birth control. . . . .
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 01, 2015, 08:20:31 PM
This is interesting

http://www.msnbc.com/shift/watch/the-docket-517107779847
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 01, 2015, 08:38:57 PM
I'm new to this thread but I did listen to the whole show as it came out. 
  It is easy to believe Adnan could be lying.  One thing that bothered me and the podcast did not dare bring up  (taboo),  Was there a possible religious motive.  Adnan was muslim and Hae was probably not muslim.  The possible religious conflict was never questioned so I still wondered was there  pressure from Adnans family to defend their "honor".  Depending on how devout his family was, isn't it  frowned upon to be dating an infidel?  The family of Adnan was conspiciously silent for the whole podcast.

Adnan's brother have been interviewed on Undisclosed. Need to understand that Adnan seems to have been at the time an American teen far less serious about his religion than he is now. He also had a new girlfriend.

Interestingly, the prosecution used exactly what you argue to deny bail.

And definitely used it in the trial too, though it was more subtle.  Frankly Adnan wasn't really much of a devout muslim.  He was more like an American Catholic. 

How sure are we about that? Hae mentioned it in her diary as one of the reasons the relationship didn't work.

I absolutely do NOT think it is evidence against Adnan, but you can't completely discount it as a plausible motive, either.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 01, 2015, 09:38:53 PM
I don't need to even consider motive.  He didn't have opportunity to do it. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 01, 2015, 09:59:00 PM
I don't need to even consider motive.  He didn't have opportunity to do it. 

How can you be certain?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 02, 2015, 01:29:13 AM
I don't need to even consider motive.  He didn't have opportunity to do it. 

How can you be certain?

I am not 100% sure but the time frame does seem to  preclude Adnan
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 02, 2015, 09:30:43 AM
I don't need to even consider motive.  He didn't have opportunity to do it. 

How can you be certain?

I am not 100% sure but the time frame does seem to  preclude Adnan

My certainty as to him not doing it is the same as my certainty that you didn't do it, DI.  After all, you can't really account for your exact whereabouts on Jan 13, 1999.....

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: pwashlow on September 02, 2015, 12:25:19 PM
Have you guys been listening to Undislosed? Sounds like they have busted the case open and found a Brady violation.  If Adnan did this, it wasn't the way Jay stated in his story.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 02, 2015, 01:34:19 PM
Have you guys been listening to Undislosed? Sounds like they have busted the case open and found a Brady violation.  If Adnan did this, it wasn't the way Jay stated in his story.

Even those who think he might be guilty on this this forum agree with that.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on September 02, 2015, 01:43:15 PM
Have you guys been listening to Undislosed? Sounds like they have busted the case open and found a Brady violation.  If Adnan did this, it wasn't the way Jay stated in his story.
The Crimestoppers thing is... weird. This is where I do kind of wish that the Undisclosed podcast had a guy on it who was more sympathetic to the prosecution. Granted, objectivit is not really the point of the podcast, but it'd be nice. As it stands it sure sounds like an obvious Brady violation to me but I am not a lawyer or even close to being one so I'm unsure how open and shut that case really is.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 03, 2015, 02:07:10 PM
I don't need to even consider motive.  He didn't have opportunity to do it. 

How can you be certain?

I am not 100% sure but the time frame does seem to  preclude Adnan

My certainty as to him not doing it is the same as my certainty that you didn't do it, DI.  After all, you can't really account for your exact whereabouts on Jan 13, 1999.....

I mean, how are you certain that he didn't have the opportunity?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on September 03, 2015, 02:48:04 PM
I don't need to even consider motive.  He didn't have opportunity to do it. 

How can you be certain?

I am not 100% sure but the time frame does seem to  preclude Adnan

My certainty as to him not doing it is the same as my certainty that you didn't do it, DI.  After all, you can't really account for your exact whereabouts on Jan 13, 1999.....

I mean, how are you certain that he didn't have the opportunity?
How certain are we that you didn't have the opportunity? Or Randall Simon, the author of "Homicide: A Year On The Streets" and noted Baltimorean?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 03, 2015, 03:21:29 PM
I don't need to even consider motive.  He didn't have opportunity to do it. 

How can you be certain?

I am not 100% sure but the time frame does seem to  preclude Adnan

My certainty as to him not doing it is the same as my certainty that you didn't do it, DI.  After all, you can't really account for your exact whereabouts on Jan 13, 1999.....

I mean, how are you certain that he didn't have the opportunity?
How certain are we that you didn't have the opportunity? Or Randall Simon, the author of "Homicide: A Year On The Streets" and noted Baltimorean?

Geez you folks are hard to talk to about this.

Is there some piece of evidence that (to any of you) means that Adnan could not have done it?

I've seen a lot of conjecture brought up, and we all agree the state's case/timeline is crap, but I haven't seen anybody mention anything that suggests Adnan couldn't have done it, as Belg implied. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on September 03, 2015, 03:31:21 PM
It's been 15 years. Your question is basically "prove to me that there isn't a giant invisible dragon hiding behind your back".
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 03, 2015, 03:52:21 PM
It's been 15 years. Your question is basically "prove to me that there isn't a giant invisible dragon hiding behind your back".

What?

Belg said that Adnan "didn't have opportunity to do it."

I'm asking what evidence he has to support that statement.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 03, 2015, 04:23:18 PM
It's been 15 years. Your question is basically "prove to me that there isn't a giant invisible dragon hiding behind your back".

What?

Belg said that Adnan "didn't have opportunity to do it."

I'm asking what evidence he has to support that statement.

The evidence supports that he went to track that afternoon and that he was on time.
The time frame between getting out of school and when he had to get back to track seems to preclude him being able to make it back on time. We also have a witness who says he was in the library and another who states that he was later told by Hae that she could not give him a ride.

Now, maybe you can work around those but I make it very doubtful.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 04, 2015, 12:52:41 AM
It's been 15 years. Your question is basically "prove to me that there isn't a giant invisible dragon hiding behind your back".

What?

Belg said that Adnan "didn't have opportunity to do it."

I'm asking what evidence he has to support that statement.

The evidence supports that he went to track that afternoon and that he was on time.

What evidence?

I think his track coach initially said he wouldn't remember who was/wasn't there, but then maybe later said he thinks Adnan was there... is that it, or is there more?


Quote
The time frame between getting out of school and when he had to get back to track seems to preclude him being able to make it back on time. We also have a witness who says he was in the library and another who states that he was later told by Hae that she could not give him a ride.

I didn't hear about somebody not being able to get a ride from Hae, just that people remember Adnan asking for a ride the day of the murder. What's that about? (I'll trust your explanation).

Even then though, this goes back to the state's case being crap. We don't know when or where Hae was murdered, we just know it didn't happen like the state said it did. Beyond that.... it seems like pure conjecture to me. I might think Adnan did it, but I have no evidence to support that; if you think Adnan didn't do it, that's cool too... but if you say, "Adnan could not have done it," I expect some evidence.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 04, 2015, 09:44:55 AM
The reason why I believe the coach is credible is because he said it was a nice day (there were few at that time of year) and that they were talking outdoors about Ramadan. According to some research as well with the Undisclosed team, track also started earlier than originally thought.
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/2015/05/i-could-immediately-relate-to-adnan-syed-when-he-told-his-attorney-that-he-recalled-attending-track-practice-on-january-13-1.html

With regards to the ride, Krista appears to be the witness that Adnan had asked Hae for a ride in the morning and she said yes at that time. Aisha then said that Hae had changed her mind in final period A.P. Psychology class.
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/2015/03/one-of-the-most-objective-figures-with-a-connection-to-the-death-of-hae-min-lee-is-krista-a-friend-to-both-lee-and-adnan-sye.html

Finally, there is the fact that there is a witness of him having been in the library during that time.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/01/21/the-serial-murder-saga-continues-alibi-witness-claims-prosecutor-supressed-her-testimony/


Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 04, 2015, 10:57:01 AM
If you think he did it you should be able to show a plausible way of it.  Otherwise you should revert to the null and say he didn't do it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 04, 2015, 12:33:58 PM
If you think he did it you should be able to show a plausible way of it.  Otherwise you should revert to the null and say he didn't do it.

I don't see any reason why they would lie about the fact but the claim was that if you were in the age group of Hae, you have a 20% of being murdered by a person whom you had sexual relations with. Right there, it means that there is a 80% that it was somebody else. Now, making it tougher, many of these are likely girls who were in abusive relationships where her boyfriend beats her regularly and many are likely girls in lower income strata (don't know how to put it better than that)

As such, the data points to it not being Adnan. Now, I don't think anybody here argues that the police should not have investigated him however.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 04, 2015, 01:14:32 PM
The reason why I believe the coach is credible is because he said it was a nice day (there were few at that time of year) and that they were talking outdoors about Ramadan. According to some research as well with the Undisclosed team, track also started earlier than originally thought.
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/2015/05/i-could-immediately-relate-to-adnan-syed-when-he-told-his-attorney-that-he-recalled-attending-track-practice-on-january-13-1.html

An old memory of the weather (coming from somebody who likely wants Adnan to be innocent) isn't all that convincing to me. It shouldn't be discounted, but it's pretty weak as far as evidence goes.



Quote
With regards to the ride, Krista appears to be the witness that Adnan had asked Hae for a ride in the morning and she said yes at that time. Aisha then said that Hae had changed her mind in final period A.P. Psychology class.
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/2015/03/one-of-the-most-objective-figures-with-a-connection-to-the-death-of-hae-min-lee-is-krista-a-friend-to-both-lee-and-adnan-sye.html

So Adnan probably asked for a ride the day of Hae's disappearance (which would not have been unusual). One friend heard Hae say she would drive him, and another said that Hae later told Adnan she could not. It's unknown whether or not Adnan actually got in the car with her that day.

Quote
Finally, there is the fact that there is a witness of him having been in the library during that time.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/01/21/the-serial-murder-saga-continues-alibi-witness-claims-prosecutor-supressed-her-testimony/

I'm not even worried about fallibility of memory here, since even if true, it doesn't clear Adnan so much as serve as yet another nail in coffin of the state's case.



If you think he did it you should be able to show a plausible way of it.  Otherwise you should revert to the null and say he didn't do it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That makes complete sense.

I think he did it in a "let's play the conjectural whodunnit game," but I agree there's no evidence against him. In the eyes of the law, I think he's innocent.

To say "he didn't have the opportunity" based on the unrelated months-old memories of two people is, imo, making too strong a statement based on weak evidence. Adnan certainly could have done it--but if we did, we don't have any clues to when or where.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 04, 2015, 01:39:43 PM
To say "he didn't have the opportunity" based on the unrelated months-old memories of two people is, imo, making too strong a statement based on weak evidence. Adnan certainly could have done it--but if we did, we don't have any clues to when or where.

Three people not two. I agree that we are expecting a lot from human memory but we really only have Jay's lying ass on the other side. As such, until there is some real evidence implicating Adnan, I make him as low probability with regards to murdering Hae.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 04, 2015, 01:59:23 PM
To say "he didn't have the opportunity" based on the unrelated months-old memories of two people is, imo, making too strong a statement based on weak evidence. Adnan certainly could have done it--but if we did, we don't have any clues to when or where.

Three people not two. I agree that we are expecting a lot from human memory but we really only have Jay's lying ass on the other side. As such, until there is some real evidence implicating Adnan, I make him as low probability with regards to murdering Hae.

That's totally respectable. I can even agree with Belg saying the "null" should be Adnan is innocent--I just had a problem with him saying Adnan couldn't have done it.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 04, 2015, 02:17:16 PM
That's totally respectable. I can even agree with Belg saying the "null" should be Adnan is innocent--I just had a problem with him saying Adnan couldn't have done it.

What is sad is that the evidence that could have proven than he did not do it is long gone. . . .For example, if there had been evidence that he had logged into Hotmail during that break, case closed as far as that. You want to strangle his defense attorney.  Sorry, bad choice of words but still drives you crazy that she did such a horrible job with the evidence.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 04, 2015, 03:25:52 PM
You are actively misrepresenting the testimony and evidence DI.   The coach's statement was that he had a conversation in January with Adnan about Ramadan during practice outside.  The only day that this COULD HAVE happened was on the 13th because they didn't practice outside any other day in January. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 04, 2015, 03:27:50 PM
So let me see if I got this right.  I should say that everyone on the planet in January 1999 is a suspect because they all COULD have done it.  I mean after all, I cannot say with absolute certainty that my little brother didn't invent teleportation from Iowa to Baltimore in 1999


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 04, 2015, 03:55:22 PM
You are actively misrepresenting the testimony and evidence DI.   The coach's statement was that he had a conversation in January with Adnan about Ramadan during practice outside.  The only day that this COULD HAVE happened was on the 13th because they didn't practice outside any other day in January. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think we can consider the coach's memory to be infallible, especially considering the time in between the incident and testimony, and the coach's (likely) desire that Adnan is innocent.

I'm not saying we should throw it away, I'm just saying I don't think it's as strong as you're making it out to be.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 04, 2015, 05:28:45 PM
Jesus the coaches memory isn't in question. In fact his testimony is that it was NOT on the 13th.  But the undisclosed group did some checking on the weather and practice dates and it could not have been any fucking day BUT the 13th. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 04, 2015, 05:36:46 PM
Jesus the coaches memory isn't in question. In fact his testimony is that it was NOT on the 13th.  But the undisclosed group did some checking on the weather and practice dates and it could not have been any fucking day BUT the 13th.

If not based on the coach's memory, how are we sure of that?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on September 04, 2015, 06:56:18 PM
Jesus the coaches memory isn't in question. In fact his testimony is that it was NOT on the 13th.  But the undisclosed group did some checking on the weather and practice dates and it could not have been any fucking day BUT the 13th.

If not based on the coach's memory, how are we sure of that?

Stick with me here, because it gets convoluted:

We can use the weather report to check the coach's statement.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 04, 2015, 08:06:46 PM
So, maybe we need to go about this another way.

Please list the specific reasons why you think he did it.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 04, 2015, 08:09:40 PM
So, maybe we need to go about this another way.

Please list the specific reasons why you think he did it.

I think most people think there is something in what Jay said  :vomit:
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 04, 2015, 08:26:53 PM
So, maybe we need to go about this another way.

Please list the specific reasons why you think he did it.

I think most people think there is something in what Jay said  :vomit:

Well, I would need a specific example, he's said a lot of things.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 05, 2015, 03:17:32 AM
Jesus the coaches memory isn't in question. In fact his testimony is that it was NOT on the 13th.  But the undisclosed group did some checking on the weather and practice dates and it could not have been any fucking day BUT the 13th.

If not based on the coach's memory, how are we sure of that?

Stick with me here, because it gets convoluted:

We can use the weather report to check the coach's statement.

Sure--but did the coach remember what they talked about, when they talked about it, and what the weather was like all accurately?

I think the answer is maybe.

Memory is really really unreliable.

And if the coach is remembering accurately, does it actually mean Adnan couldn't have done it? Of course not. There is way too much that we don't know to say that "Adnan couldn't have done it," which is the only statement I'm arguing against.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on September 05, 2015, 08:16:16 AM
No, I think Belg has a point here. You're now saying that the coach was in a conspiracy or that his memory is so bad that he remembers a conversation that he had inside to actually be outside. It's also possible that space ninjas killed Hae. Why aren't we pursuing that equally reasonable option?

The timeline is so broken that now even Jay has (once again but after 15 years) changed his story about it.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 05, 2015, 11:47:44 AM
No, I think Belg has a point here. You're now saying that the coach was in a conspiracy or that his memory is so bad that he remembers a conversation that he had inside to actually be outside. It's also possible that space ninjas killed Hae. Why aren't we pursuing that equally reasonable option?

The timeline is so broken that now even Jay has (once again but after 15 years) changed his story about it.

 :D

I'm saying he might have misremembered anything from the date, to the location, to the ambient temperature during the conversation. Memory really is that bad!

I'm not saying we should completely discount it.

I AM saying it's not strong enough to prove that Adnan "could not have done it."
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 05, 2015, 11:52:38 AM
No, I think Belg has a point here. You're now saying that the coach was in a conspiracy or that his memory is so bad that he remembers a conversation that he had inside to actually be outside. It's also possible that space ninjas killed Hae. Why aren't we pursuing that equally reasonable option?

The timeline is so broken that now even Jay has (once again but after 15 years) changed his story about it.

 :D

I'm saying he might have misremembered anything from the date, to the location, to the ambient temperature during the conversation. Memory really is that bad!

I'm not saying we should completely discount it.

I AM saying it's not strong enough to prove that Adnan "could not have done it."

I think one way to consider it is, assuming we had a "short list" with regards to suspects, he actually should be taken off that list. Maybe keep him as a "person of interest" but start looking at other viable suspects.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 05, 2015, 11:55:54 AM
No, I think Belg has a point here. You're now saying that the coach was in a conspiracy or that his memory is so bad that he remembers a conversation that he had inside to actually be outside. It's also possible that space ninjas killed Hae. Why aren't we pursuing that equally reasonable option?

The timeline is so broken that now even Jay has (once again but after 15 years) changed his story about it.

 :D

I'm saying he might have misremembered anything from the date, to the location, to the ambient temperature during the conversation. Memory really is that bad!

I'm not saying we should completely discount it.

I AM saying it's not strong enough to prove that Adnan "could not have done it."

I think one way to consider it is, assuming we had a "short list" with regards to suspects, he actually should be taken off that list. Maybe keep him as a "person of interest" but start looking at other viable suspects.

I'd keep him on mine, but I understand why another person might take him off theirs.

Despite the PROVE ME HE GUILTY@!! posts in response to me here, I've made it very clear that I think there is no evidence against Adnan.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 05, 2015, 12:15:03 PM
I'd keep him on mine, but I understand why another person might take him off theirs.

Despite the PROVE ME HE GUILTY@!! posts in response to me here, I've made it very clear that I think there is no evidence against Adnan.

Even though eye witness testimony is not really reliable, I think it is strong enough to say that he does not appear to have had the opportunity.  We appear to have three witnesses that destroy the argument that he could have done it.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 05, 2015, 12:29:50 PM
I'd keep him on mine, but I understand why another person might take him off theirs.

Despite the PROVE ME HE GUILTY@!! posts in response to me here, I've made it very clear that I think there is no evidence against Adnan.

Even though eye witness testimony is not really reliable, I think it is strong enough to say that he does not appear to have had the opportunity.  We appear to have three witnesses that destroy the argument that he could have done it.

I disagree, since once we forget about the state's timeline, there are a million and one ways in which Adnan could have done it that don't necessarily conflict with the witnesses.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 05, 2015, 12:34:18 PM
I'd keep him on mine, but I understand why another person might take him off theirs.

Despite the PROVE ME HE GUILTY@!! posts in response to me here, I've made it very clear that I think there is no evidence against Adnan.

Even though eye witness testimony is not really reliable, I think it is strong enough to say that he does not appear to have had the opportunity.  We appear to have three witnesses that destroy the argument that he could have done it.

I disagree, since once we forget about the state's timeline, there are a million and one ways in which Adnan could have done it that don't necessarily conflict with the witnesses.

But that argument can be used to say ANYONE ON THE PLANET could have done it.  All we have to do is disregard the state's timeline and the forensic evidence etc.  You're basically doing the William Lane Craig argument for the existence of god.  Since we cannot definitively prove that Adnan didn't do it, then we must assume he did do it.

We don't need to definitively prove he didn't do it, although I think we've reached near metaphysical certitude that he didn't.  You're saying keep him on the short list.  Why?  What facts argue to keep him on the list? 

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 05, 2015, 12:40:46 PM
But that argument can be used to say ANYONE ON THE PLANET could have done it.  All we have to do is disregard the state's timeline and the forensic evidence etc.  You're basically doing the William Lane Craig argument for the existence of god.  Since we cannot definitively prove that Adnan didn't do it, then we must assume he did do it.

We don't need to definitively prove he didn't do it, although I think we've reached near metaphysical certitude that he didn't.

I was only arguing against your positive claim that "he didn't have the opportunity." You base your certainty on a few bits of memory-based circumstantial evidence, which I think is far too weak to support your claim.

Quote
You're saying keep him on the short list.  Why?  What facts argue to keep him on the list?

I'd keep him on my short list because he had the best opportunity of anybody to get to Hae between school letting out and her picking up her cousin from daycare (a difficult thing to do, imo; Hae wouldn't have shirked her responsibility easily), and despite Jay's presented story being fabricated, I think (pure conjecture) it's more likely that he was involved and lied to cover the depth of his own crimes than he made everything up due to police pressure or to claim a reward.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 05, 2015, 01:26:01 PM


I'd keep him on my short list because he had the best opportunity of anybody to get to Hae between school letting out and her picking up her cousin from daycare (a difficult thing to do, imo; Hae wouldn't have shirked her responsibility easily),


Really?  Interesting that you say that.  When there are at least 3 people who remember facts that would PRECLUDE him from doing it, you disregard all 3 for the known falsehoods of Jay to support the idea that he killed Hae.

In this you suggest he murdered Hae on the prosecution's timeline, yet previously you said the timeline doesn't work. 

1) Do you know how much time Adnan had from his last class (which we know he was in) to his practice? 
2) Do you know what the 'typical' ride for Adnan was when he would get a ride from someone?

It really seems like you're post-hoc rationalizing by trusting some people's memory and discounting others.  BTW, do you know that Neighbor Boy was recently interviewed and we now have 5th different story from Jay?  Do you know that Jay was recently confronted with the idea of getting this reward money and his answers were suspicious? 

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 05, 2015, 01:47:59 PM
It really seems like you're post-hoc rationalizing by trusting some people's memory and discounting others.  BTW, do you know that Neighbor Boy was recently interviewed and we now have 5th different story from Jay?  Do you know that Jay was recently confronted with the idea of getting this reward money and his answers were suspicious?

Do you have a source on this?
Edit: I did a google search and did not find anything - if you could at least suggest the keywords that you used to find it?

By the way, I think neighbor boy is more than story #5.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 05, 2015, 01:59:33 PM
It really seems like you're post-hoc rationalizing by trusting some people's memory and discounting others.  BTW, do you know that Neighbor Boy was recently interviewed and we now have 5th different story from Jay?  Do you know that Jay was recently confronted with the idea of getting this reward money and his answers were suspicious?

Do you have a source on this?
Edit: I did a google search and did not find anything - if you could at least suggest the keywords that you used to find it?

By the way, I think neighbor boy is more than story #5.

The last Serial Dynasty episode.  Let me find the link:

http://serialdynasty.podomatic.com/entry/2015-08-30T04_36_41-07_00

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 05, 2015, 03:25:57 PM
I did not thing he said anything about Jay being confronted with the reward? Was it Neighbor Boy?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 05, 2015, 04:02:34 PM


I'd keep him on my short list because he had the best opportunity of anybody to get to Hae between school letting out and her picking up her cousin from daycare (a difficult thing to do, imo; Hae wouldn't have shirked her responsibility easily),


Really?  Interesting that you say that.  When there are at least 3 people who remember facts that would PRECLUDE him from doing it, you disregard all 3 for the known falsehoods of Jay to support the idea that he killed Hae.

If all three people are remembering things accurately, then obviously the state's timeline is shit... but we already know that. If all three people are remembering things accurately, there are still plausible scenarios in which Adnan kills Hae.

Quote
In this you suggest he murdered Hae on the prosecution's timeline, yet previously you said the timeline doesn't work. 

The prosecution's timeline is crap.

Quote
1) Do you know how much time Adnan had from his last class (which we know he was in) to his practice? 

Do you know for a fact he was on time to practice?

Do you know for a fact that the coach correctly remembers Adnan's presence that specific day? (Is it possible that the coach remembered facts later on that would vindicate Adnan because the coach wishes it to be true?)

Quote
2) Do you know what the 'typical' ride for Adnan was when he would get a ride from someone?

To his car, right?

This is exactly why Adnan is my prime suspect: he had the ability to get close to Hae between the time she left class and the time she didn't go to pick up her cousin.

Quote
It really seems like you're post-hoc rationalizing by trusting some people's memory and discounting others.  BTW, do you know that Neighbor Boy was recently interviewed and we now have 5th different story from Jay?  Do you know that Jay was recently confronted with the idea of getting this reward money and his answers were suspicious?

Which memory am I trusting more than others?

Jay telling lies? I AM SHOCKED!
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 05, 2015, 04:50:24 PM
I did not thing he said anything about Jay being confronted with the reward? Was it Neighbor Boy?

No, he asked him about it specifically.  I can't remember the exact time that he discussed Jay, but listen again.  He claims to have confronted him with it in an email exchange.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 05, 2015, 04:52:29 PM
I did not thing he said anything about Jay being confronted with the reward? Was it Neighbor Boy?

No, he asked him about it specifically.  I can't remember the exact time that he discussed Jay, but listen again.  He claims to have confronted him with it in an email exchange.

Ok, I had forgotten. I usually listen to the podcasts twice but only listen to it once
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 05, 2015, 04:54:35 PM
I have no idea what you wrote DI, you messed up the formatting something fierce.

Let me ask the following:

1) Do you know that he was late?  What is your evidence that he's late?

2) If you think the prosecution timeline is shit, then you shouldn't even be arguing about what he did between class and track practice.  Your response should be 'I don't care what he did between class and practice, because that's NOT when he did it'  Otherwise, if it's important, then you're basically arguing the prosecution timeline.  You can't have it both ways, which is it?

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 05, 2015, 04:55:06 PM
I did not thing he said anything about Jay being confronted with the reward? Was it Neighbor Boy?

No, he asked him about it specifically.  I can't remember the exact time that he discussed Jay, but listen again.  He claims to have confronted him with it in an email exchange.

Ok, I had forgotten. I usually listen to the podcasts twice but only listen to it once

Once you find the bit where he's talking about Jay, he does do it all in one go.  He doesn't come back to it.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 05, 2015, 05:20:22 PM
Once you find the bit where he's talking about Jay, he does do it all in one go.  He doesn't come back to it.

Hmm, the answer was kind of suspicious . . . . . You would think he would have simply answered "No, I did not get the reward" or "what are you talking about?" instead of "I have been threatened before."
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 05, 2015, 07:09:35 PM
Once you find the bit where he's talking about Jay, he does do it all in one go.  He doesn't come back to it.

Hmm, the answer was kind of suspicious . . . . . You would think he would have simply answered "No, I did not get the reward" or "what are you talking about?" instead of "I have been threatened before."


Exactly.  Although, in fairness, we do not know exactly how the question was put to him, but the answer to me seems very suspicious.

For everyone else:  Essentially the host of the podcast contacted Jay and was able to ask him about this CrimeStoppers reward for a tip on Feb 1(Which was never disclosed to the defense, surprise surprise) this reward wasn't paid out until November.  The hosts of this podcast contacted Jay and asked him if he got the reward.  The answer was as DF indicates above.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 05, 2015, 11:33:21 PM
I have no idea what you wrote DI, you messed up the formatting something fierce.

Let me ask the following:

1) Do you know that he was late?  What is your evidence that he's late?

2) If you think the prosecution timeline is shit, then you shouldn't even be arguing about what he did between class and track practice.  Your response should be 'I don't care what he did between class and practice, because that's NOT when he did it'  Otherwise, if it's important, then you're basically arguing the prosecution timeline.  You can't have it both ways, which is it?

In the last episode of Undisclosed, the hosts argued (and I think quite well) that being late is more likely to attract attention than not showing up might. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 05, 2015, 11:39:02 PM
I have no idea what you wrote DI, you messed up the formatting something fierce.

Let me ask the following:

1) Do you know that he was late?  What is your evidence that he's late?

2) If you think the prosecution timeline is shit, then you shouldn't even be arguing about what he did between class and track practice.  Your response should be 'I don't care what he did between class and practice, because that's NOT when he did it'  Otherwise, if it's important, then you're basically arguing the prosecution timeline.  You can't have it both ways, which is it?

In the last episode of Undisclosed, the hosts argued (and I think quite well) that being late is more likely to attract attention than not showing up might.

Yes, exactly.  Being late is a memorable event.  On time is quickly forgotten.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 06, 2015, 02:14:04 AM
"I'm sure they would have remembered him being late, therefore it's impossible he was late" seems a very shoddy argument.

(formatting fixed in that earlier post, sorry Belg)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 06, 2015, 02:52:38 AM
Yes, exactly.  Being late is a memorable event.  On time is quickly forgotten.

If you have not listened to it, you need to listen to the newest Serial Dynasty
He makes Don a much more likely suspect.

Speaking about Don, it is kind of weird that he did not get back to the cops until around 01:30, right after what would have been the likely time for burying the body.  In addition, wasn't one of the searches for Hae's car made in Bel Air, where don went to school and likely lived in the area as well.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 06, 2015, 11:27:31 AM
Yes, exactly.  Being late is a memorable event.  On time is quickly forgotten.

If you have not listened to it, you need to listen to the newest Serial Dynasty
He makes Don a much more likely suspect.

Via evidence, or savvy conjecture?

Quote
Speaking about Don, it is kind of weird that he did not get back to the cops until around 01:30, right after what would have been the likely time for burying the body.  In addition, wasn't one of the searches for Hae's car made in Bel Air, where don went to school and likely lived in the area as well.

Doesn't sound like anything one could draw any meaningful conclusions from... this is the type of "evidence" that's been bothering me. The same shoddy evidence doesn't work against Adnan, so y'all can't use it to clear him, either.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 06, 2015, 12:00:18 PM
The evidence is pretty clear.  The timecard that was used as Don's alibi isn't Don's timecard.  The employee number on the timecard wasn't Don's.

Obviously that's not going to be evidence that he did it, but does throw him back into the evidence pool.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 06, 2015, 12:04:49 PM
The evidence is pretty clear.  The timecard that was used as Don's alibi isn't Don's timecard.  The employee number on the timecard wasn't Don's.

Obviously that's not going to be evidence that he did it, but does throw him back into the evidence pool.

I'll agree there, he's got to be considered highly suspect as well.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 06, 2015, 12:55:30 PM
FYI Don's mother was the general manager and was the only person that could access all the time cards.  Additionally Don's claim was that he was covering a 9 to 6 shift for another employee.  Looking at the shift schedules there were no people scheduled to work from 9 to 6.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 06, 2015, 12:57:51 PM
FYI Don's mother was the general manager and was the only person that could access all the time cards.  Additionally Don's claim was that he was covering a 9 to 6 shift for another employee.  Looking at the shift schedules there were no people scheduled to work from 9 to 6.

Could be that they're covering something up, could be that Don didn't have to play by the same rules as employees with timecards and schedules due to mommy being the GM.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 06, 2015, 02:37:04 PM
FYI Don's mother was the general manager and was the only person that could access all the time cards.  Additionally Don's claim was that he was covering a 9 to 6 shift for another employee.  Looking at the shift schedules there were no people scheduled to work from 9 to 6.

Could be that they're covering something up, could be that Don didn't have to play by the same rules as employees with timecards and schedules due to mommy being the GM.

You get paid through your employee number. . . . .If your employee number does not match, you do not get paid. Of note, all Lenscrafter stores are corporate owned as well.

Of note, when an employee substitutes for another, they usually scratch out the previous name and put the new name in. There is none of that with the schedule for that week with that time and shift.

The big thing is that with Don, he has no alibi at all for the whole day. Nobody seems to know what he did all day long.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 06, 2015, 03:03:19 PM
FYI Don's mother was the general manager and was the only person that could access all the time cards.  Additionally Don's claim was that he was covering a 9 to 6 shift for another employee.  Looking at the shift schedules there were no people scheduled to work from 9 to 6.

Could be that they're covering something up, could be that Don didn't have to play by the same rules as employees with timecards and schedules due to mommy being the GM.

You get paid through your employee number. . . . .If your employee number does not match, you do not get paid. Of note, all Lenscrafter stores are corporate owned as well.

Of note, when an employee substitutes for another, they usually scratch out the previous name and put the new name in. There is none of that with the schedule for that week with that time and shift.

The big thing is that with Don, he has no alibi at all for the whole day. Nobody seems to know what he did all day long.

His alibi is that he was working, there's just no evidence to back up that claim. He should be high on the suspect list, for sure.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 06, 2015, 03:08:18 PM
His alibi is that he was working, there's just no evidence to back up that claim. He should be high on the suspect list, for sure.

Want to make it clear that I have no idea if he is the person who murdered Hae although I hazarded a guess early on that he was the most likely suspect.

The problem is not so much that his alibi has no evidence backing it up but there is evidence specifically contradicting it
1. Employees numbers do not match
2. There is no employee in that time slot
3. No names have been scratched out and replaces with his
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 06, 2015, 03:10:05 PM
His alibi is that he was working, there's just no evidence to back up that claim. He should be high on the suspect list, for sure.

Want to make it clear that I have no idea if he is the person who murdered Hae although I hazarded a guess early on that he was the most likely suspect.

The problem is not so much that his alibi has no evidence backing it up but there is evidence specifically contradicting it
1. Employees numbers do not match
2. There is no employee in that time slot
3. No names have been scratched out and replaces with his

Again, with a mother as GM, it's plausible that formalities were not always strictly observed.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 06, 2015, 03:29:13 PM
His alibi is that he was working, there's just no evidence to back up that claim. He should be high on the suspect list, for sure.

Want to make it clear that I have no idea if he is the person who murdered Hae although I hazarded a guess early on that he was the most likely suspect.

The problem is not so much that his alibi has no evidence backing it up but there is evidence specifically contradicting it
1. Employees numbers do not match
2. There is no employee in that time slot
3. No names have been scratched out and replaces with his

Again, with a mother as GM, it's plausible that formalities were not always strictly observed.

1. If you mother is the manager or not, your employee numbers have to match in order to get paid
2. Maybe they slid the times around
3. I consider this more an item of informal housekeeping that it does not matter if your mother in the GM.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 06, 2015, 04:42:00 PM
Mummy being GM might mean that there are loopholes to take advantage of. And he said he was working for a friend, so maybe it was an unofficial time trading sort of deal. I'd wager there are plenty of other plausible reasons that we can't even think of.

I'm sure there are many other possibilities, I don't think this is the smoking gun that Adnan's supporters want it to be.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 06, 2015, 05:28:20 PM
Stop. Just stop.  If the time card is fake and I can't think of a legitimate reason that it isn't, that in and of itself is evidence of guilt.  If you fake a time card and send it to the police (remember it wasn't provided to the defense, it was provided to the prosecution only AFTER the defense indicated that they would point to Don as the culprit)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 06, 2015, 05:29:02 PM
Mummy being GM might mean that there are loopholes to take advantage of. And he said he was working for a friend, so maybe it was an unofficial time trading sort of deal. I'd wager there are plenty of other plausible reasons that we can't even think of.

I'm sure there are many other possibilities, I don't think this is the smoking gun that Adnan's supporters want it to be.

Is all of that really more likely that his mother covering for him not having an alibi? I am not saying he is guilty but it is extremely suspicious?

Part of my point is that the evidence against Don is stronger than against Adnan.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 06, 2015, 05:40:47 PM
I agree that it's some circumstantial evidence that weakens Don's alibi. It's possible his mom helped him fake an alibi, and it's also possible that he and his mom had some shady dealings in the business that they didn't want discovered.

Y'all aren't considering ANY possibilities that don't help Adnan.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 06, 2015, 05:55:53 PM
I agree that it's some circumstantial evidence that weakens Don's alibi. It's possible his mom helped him fake an alibi, and it's also possible that he and his mom had some shady dealings in the business that they didn't want discovered.

Y'all aren't considering ANY possibilities that don't help Adnan.

You know what Lenscrafters is? Can you explain what you mean by shady dealings?

To be clear, Don was a lab tech not a sales man and he also was not the senior lab tech, more of an assistant.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 06, 2015, 06:04:20 PM
I agree that it's some circumstantial evidence that weakens Don's alibi. It's possible his mom helped him fake an alibi, and it's also possible that he and his mom had some shady dealings in the business that they didn't want discovered.

Y'all aren't considering ANY possibilities that don't help Adnan.

You know what Lenscrafters is? Can you explain what you mean by shady dealings?

To be clear, Don was a lab tech not a sales man and he also was not the senior lab tech, more of an assistant.

Yes, the mall-based glasses store. I believe a GM would likely know ways to game the system in favor of a specific employee, if they so desired. Just one of many possibilities that I think are being neglected because they don't favor Adnan. I'll bet an unbiased podcast would talk about them more often...
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 06, 2015, 06:16:00 PM
It sounds like you are arguing that you really don't have a clue yourself but you know that there are "innocent" explanations?

The fact is that the first copy of his work records for that day showed that he had not worked, a second copy showed that he had worked but the forms had the wrong employee number. This was all about nine months after the murder and just before the trial. These work records are not even corroborated by the store schedule. 

This is not really strange to you?   
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 06, 2015, 06:44:18 PM
It sounds like you are arguing that you really don't have a clue yourself but you know that there are "innocent" explanations?

Of course I don't have a clue, none of us do. I'm taking issue with some very strong claims about Adnan's innocent (and now Don's guilt) with little but conjecture to back it up.


Quote
The fact is that the first copy of his work records for that day showed that he had not worked, a second copy showed that he had worked but the forms had the wrong employee number. This was all about nine months after the murder and just before the trial. These work records are not even corroborated by the store schedule. 

This is not really strange to you?

It's worth noting, and weakens his alibi--but since it could mean almost anything, it's not worth considering as evidence against him.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 06, 2015, 07:32:41 PM
In honesty, I don't want it to be Don. I want it to be Roy Davis or Ronald Lee Moore.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on September 06, 2015, 07:40:54 PM
If it was Don I have no idea how you'd prove that.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 06, 2015, 08:46:43 PM
If it was Don I have no idea how you'd prove that.

Short of a confession, I don't think you could.   

With respect to looking for evidence pointing towards Adnan's guilt, there isn't much of anything, and I've been looking ever since Serial.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 06, 2015, 09:38:36 PM
If it was Don I have no idea how you'd prove that.

Even if you have DNA, it sounds very much like they were intimate and even casual contact has been known to transfer DNA.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 06, 2015, 09:42:16 PM
If it was Don I have no idea how you'd prove that.

Short of a confession, I don't think you could.   

With respect to looking for evidence pointing towards Adnan's guilt, there isn't much of anything, and I've been looking ever since Serial.

A person posted a list from Ann Brocklehurst, supposedly a pro-guilt that is suppose to one of the best:

This is hers
So, for the record, let me tell you why I’m convinced Adnan is guilty.

Adnan should remember what happened on that very un-normal day. He was called by police the same day his ex-girlfriend disappeared. He was interviewed by police two weeks later. The whole “I can’t remember that normal day six weeks ago” schtick is total BS. And Koenig was a sucker for believing it. There is no good explanation for why Adnan has no alibi. He was aware the day Hae went missing something was seriously wrong.
Jay has no reason for framing Adnan nor does anyone else let alone Roy Sharonnie Davis or Ronald Lee Moore, who, between the two of them, probably have the combined IQ of a cactus plant.
Adnan has no explanation whatsoever as to how he landed in this position. Yes, I know Deirdre Enright said innocent people often can’t help their case. But she was talking about not being able to find a body in a field as opposed to having no idea whatsoever why your buddy Jay might want to frame you for murder. People who work with killers will also tell you that this vaguey-vague “someone must have framed me but I don’t know why” explanation is a pretty common one among the guilty.
Adnan has consistently lied about how people reacted to Hae’s disppearance, claiming it was no big deal, which is completely implausible. Hae had a new a boyfriend, a class trip to France booked, and university to look forward to. There was no way she’d take off to California in the middle of her senior year.
Adnan’s good friend Imran appears to have been actively trying to discourage Hae’s California friends from looking for her a week after her disappearance, when, according to Adnan, no one was concerned she was gone.
Adnan had no reason for lending Jay his car. The idea that he was concerned about Jay getting a birthday present for Stephanie is laughable.
Adnan lied about asking Hae for a ride, contradicting the testimony of Krista and Debbie.
Adnan wrote “I’m going to kill” on a break-up note from Hae telling him to back off. (If you think that’s no biggie, let me know how you feel about it when you see your daughters writing a note like that and then discover the recipient’s decorated it with “I’m going to kill.”)
Adnan exhibited other stalkery behaviour towards Hae. She hid from him at school and wrote in her diary that he was possessive.
Adnan never tried to contact Hae after January 13th even though he called her three times the night before.
There is no explanation for the Nisha call other than an improbable butt dial.
Adnan’s cell phone records place him in Leakin Park burying Hae’s body.


This is my (almost off the cuff) response:
1. There have been shows on TV where they have staged serious incidents. When asked questions about it later on, they often could not remember important details. Edit: This was on the program Unsolved History.
2. Nobody knows who killed the boys with the West Memphis Three yet did not stop them from being framed by another kid at the juvenile facility. Another case is where the guy who framed James Barton also appears to have had no reason. Jay did have pending drug charges that later faded away. Edit: If it was one of those two others who killed Hae, I do not think Jay was involved, just he was convinced by the cops to help him.
3. Adnan had loaned Jay his car in the past and so had other students at the school.
4. As far as I know, Adnan did not lie about asking Hae for a ride. He seems to actually though have been asking a ride to the track, something which he had in the past, not a ride home.
5. I am not real sure on the letter. It was from November after all and there seems to be a lot of confusion involving it. There is also the usual teenage drama involved.
6. For all the "stalking" talked about in the diary, there seems to be more innuendo than any real references. The hiding in school seems to not be anything as serious as what some people suggest.
7. Don also never tried to call Hae again.
8. You have never butt dialed a phone? That really seems to be the best explanation.
9. the whole area involved in all of these calls is just a few square miles. Sometimes cell phones will hit other towers. The cops did not do a comprehensive cell phone record and it was done eight or nine months after January. The networks at that time were under constant upgrades.
In addition, the best evidence we have based on livity is that the body was buried much later than the time he could have been in the park and Jay later (last year) changed the time frame himself to midnight.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 06, 2015, 10:25:28 PM
Exactly.   Also NONE of those are direct evidence of foul play. They are essentially anomaly hunting
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 07, 2015, 10:47:15 PM
Drunken Idaho:

Listening to the Labor Day addendum, it sounds like they got some better high quality pictures of Hae's body in her burial position. We discussed earlier that she could have lain in the Senta chest down with her legs folded upwards.

Apparently, she was lain completely flat with her legs straight out as well. Of note though, it also sounds like one of her hands was is a strange position. Likely, it stayed in that position after being frozen.

This would seem to preclude her being in the trunk until being buried as we had discussed.

I have emailed Collin and I hope he might be able to describe better
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 07, 2015, 11:20:49 PM
Drunken Idaho:

Listening to the Labor Day addendum, it sounds like they got some better high quality pictures of Hae's body in her burial position. We discussed earlier that she could have lain in the Senta chest down with her legs folded upwards.

Apparently, she was lain completely flat with her legs straight out as well. Of note though, it also sounds like one of her hands was is a strange position. Likely, it stayed in that position after being frozen.

This would seem to preclude her being in the trunk until being buried as we had discussed.

I have emailed Collin and I hope he might be able to describe better

Very interesting. Are the pictures released, or are we trusting the opinion of somebody who is openly advocating for Adnan?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 07, 2015, 11:32:31 PM
Very interesting. Are the pictures released, or are we trusting the opinion of somebody who is openly advocating for Adnan?

From what I have seen on various cases, pictures of corpses are rarely released. Did however send them to Dr. Hlavaty. If Collin Miller took her name in vane, I am pretty sure that his chain will be jerked pretty hard.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 07, 2015, 11:34:35 PM
I take him at his word.  He's an attorney and if he is representing that the body was in a certain position then I believe him.  Jesus.  He might have an opinion as to what it means but the fact of the position of the body is fairly clear.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 07, 2015, 11:35:54 PM
I take him at his word.  He's an attorney and if he is representing that the body was in a certain position then I believe him.  Jesus.  He might have an opinion as to what it means but the fact of the position of the body is fairly clear.

In this case, I consider Dr. Hlavaty the one who is important here.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 07, 2015, 11:37:16 PM
I take him at his word.  He's an attorney and if he is representing that the body was in a certain position then I believe him.  Jesus.  He might have an opinion as to what it means but the fact of the position of the body is fairly clear.

Sure, I'm interested to hear his opinions as well.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 07, 2015, 11:41:10 PM
I take him at his word.  He's an attorney and if he is representing that the body was in a certain position then I believe him.  Jesus.  He might have an opinion as to what it means but the fact of the position of the body is fairly clear.

Sure, I'm interested to hear his opinions as well.

Well, it is only a 20 minute podcast so you could just listen to it. Would send you a link but seem to be having a feed problem at the moment.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 14, 2015, 10:27:09 AM
Here is a link to the mini-episode
https://audioboom.com/boos/3548472-labor-day-minisode

Of note, many of your arguments with regards to Don were addresses by Serial Dynasty including that the supposed employee number used by by Don was only used that one time in all of the employees records for him.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 14, 2015, 10:39:10 AM
Here is a link to the mini-episode
https://audioboom.com/boos/3548472-labor-day-minisode

Of note, many of your arguments with regards to Don were addresses by Serial Dynasty including that the supposed employee number used by by Don was only used that one time in all of the employees records for him.

By 'one time' we mean 'that week'
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 14, 2015, 10:44:23 AM
Here is a link to the mini-episode
https://audioboom.com/boos/3548472-labor-day-minisode

Of note, many of your arguments with regards to Don were addresses by Serial Dynasty including that the supposed employee number used by by Don was only used that one time in all of the employees records for him.

By 'one time' we mean 'that week'

I will have to listen to it but I thought there was only one entry using that number. My phone is charging but will listen to it when I take my dog for his constitutional   ;D
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 14, 2015, 12:14:29 PM
Listen specifically to the date.  I think they talk about the 13th and the 16th.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 14, 2015, 01:55:11 PM
Listen specifically to the date.  I think they talk about the 13th and the 16th.

I listened to it again and you are right. . . . . I was a bit confused about the times and dates.

It is interesting how he had to race from one store to another. When I have had to race from one job to another, it usually is a topic of conversation. It is also interesting that he was not even scheduled to work either the day of Hae's disappearance or that Saturday.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 15, 2015, 07:41:02 AM
The latest Undisclosed tells a lot but hard from me to encapsulate

"Jay, if you don't cooperate with us, we will had you off to the county where you will be tried for murder one in front of an all while jury and probably be given the death penalty."

Don't know if they ever said that directly, as they did with the Norfolk Four, but it would not surprise me  if they had. In any case, having the death penalty over one's head causes one to being willing to just about anything.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 15, 2015, 12:35:44 PM
Undisclosed seems to be really good at making up conjecture that sounds great to those that want Adnan to be innocent...
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on September 15, 2015, 12:45:07 PM
Undisclosed seems to be really good at making up conjecture that sounds great to those that want Adnan to be innocent...

So to avoid that back and forth where you slowly walk this blanket statement back; can you give me some examples?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 15, 2015, 12:51:48 PM
Desert Fox's most recent post doesn't quote anything or present any evidence, but makes the case (again) that Jay was threatened by the police.

Desert Fox and Belgarath are talking about the inconsistencies with Don's work records as if the only possibility is that they were used to cover something up.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 15, 2015, 01:24:29 PM
Desert Fox's most recent post doesn't quote anything or present any evidence, but makes the case (again) that Jay was threatened by the police.

Desert Fox and Belgarath are talking about the inconsistencies with Don's work records as if the only possibility is that they were used to cover something up.

You have stated in the past that you really do not want to listen to podcasts or read the source material behind them.

Most of your arguments with regard to Don were explored by Bob of Serial Dynasty.

As far as Jay possibly facing the death penalty in he did not take the deal, that appears to have been from his own defense attorney.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 15, 2015, 01:32:29 PM
Desert Fox's most recent post doesn't quote anything or present any evidence, but makes the case (again) that Jay was threatened by the police.

Desert Fox and Belgarath are talking about the inconsistencies with Don's work records as if the only possibility is that they were used to cover something up.

Umm, if you listen to the podcast (which you won't) you'll find that probably all of those possibilities have been closed off.

And yes, Jay's own attorney seems to be saying that if he didn't testify, he would have been charged with murder with the death penalty.

I can tell you that if I stood a chance of facing the death penalty, I don't know what I would do.  I could certainly see myself making stuff up to get out of it.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 15, 2015, 01:33:01 PM
Desert Fox's most recent post doesn't quote anything or present any evidence, but makes the case (again) that Jay was threatened by the police.

Desert Fox and Belgarath are talking about the inconsistencies with Don's work records as if the only possibility is that they were used to cover something up.

You have stated in the past that you really do not want to listen to podcasts or read the source material behind them.

I've said that I really WANT to know if any evidence is ever presented in them, and the answer was "no." I listened to one episode (randomly selected, since everybody refused to answer my request for "which episodes contain the best evidence,") and it was devoid of anything but conjecture.

Quote
Most of your arguments with regard to Don were explored by Bob of Serial Dynasty.

My "arguments" have simply been suggesting that the evidence we possess from Lenscrafters could mean many different things. Did Bob of Serial Dynasty defeat those possibilities with conjecture, or evidence?

Quote
As far as Jay possibly facing the death penalty in he did not take the deal, that appears to have been from his own defense attorney.

Appears to have been? Doesn't sound like evidence...  ;D
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 15, 2015, 01:48:39 PM
Bob attempted to research a number of possible criticisms by looking at the evidence, talking to Luxottica corporate as well as Lens Crafters employees and ex-employees.

What Bob said at the end is what I agree with - that is that he does not know if Don is guilty of the murder of Hae but the evidence he has in enough to remove him off the "Ruled Out" list.

I am usually listening to podcasts when I am walking, investigating stuff, etc. With both Undisclosed and Serial Dynasty, I usually listen to them twice. I forget the exact wording but the Undisclosed Team got it from talking to Jay's lawyer.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 15, 2015, 01:59:27 PM
Bob attempted to research a number of possible criticisms by looking at the evidence, talking to Luxottica corporate as well as Lens Crafters employees and ex-employees.

What Bob said at the end is what I agree with - that is that he does not know if Don is guilty of the murder of Hae but the evidence he has in enough to remove him off the "Ruled Out" list.

I am usually listening to podcasts when I am walking, investigating stuff, etc. With both Undisclosed and Serial Dynasty, I usually listen to them twice. I forget the exact wording but the Undisclosed Team got it from talking to Jay's lawyer.

They've essentially eliminated every piece of 'evidence' that points towards Adnan's innocence.  The only thing left is Jay and Jay seems to have been forced into testifying.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 15, 2015, 02:01:51 PM
Bob attempted to research a number of possible criticisms by looking at the evidence, talking to Luxottica corporate as well as Lens Crafters employees and ex-employees.

What Bob said at the end is what I agree with - that is that he does not know if Don is guilty of the murder of Hae but the evidence he has in enough to remove him off the "Ruled Out" list.

hahah!! See this is why I am really hesitant to listen to more of this podcast. "Not ruled out" is where I already am on Don, and if I had to listen to an hour of somebody interviewing Lenscrafters employees just to tell me that, I'd be pretty pissed.

Quote
I forget the exact wording but the Undisclosed Team got it from talking to Jay's lawyer.

Current lawyer? Lawyer Jay talked to at the time of Adnan's arrest? Is that what Jay told the lawyer, or did the lawyer have other reasons to believe it?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 15, 2015, 02:16:32 PM
You know, we need to start another threat for discussing books, podcasts and movies with people who don't freaking listen, read or watch the thing we're talking about.

While I love you to death DI, I'm just not going to engage anymore on this stuff if you're not going to listen to the thing we're trying to talk about and just throw bombs from the sidelines.  It's basically what the Climate Change denialists do and it's really not very productive.

Pretty much everything in your post is wrong.

1) He didn't interview people on the podcast.
2) I don't care if you 'haven't ruled out Don'  The important point is that the police fucking ruled out Don almost immediately based on this contradictory and falsified evidence.  We don't really care WHY it was falsified, the mere fact that it was shows that Don likely wasn't where he said he was and the fact that he used it to eliminate himself from consideration is evidence of deception.
3) His original lawyer.  You know the one that the prosecutor got for him, which is totally unethical and as far as any of the undisclosed lawyers have ever heard has never before or since happened. Prosecutors do NOT get lawyers for defendants, ever.
4) Jay NEVER talked to a lawyer at the time of his arrest.  Jay never talked to a lawyer before any of his interviews.  Jay couldn't talk to a lawyer about his interviews because he couldn't afford one and he wasn't charged with a crime so he wasn't owed one.
5) Jay got a lawyer after the police learned that Jay wasn't likely to testify against Adnan.  They had to fix that quick, so the hauled his ass in and threatened him with a capital offence.  His entire plea deal happened from getting the lawyer to charging to deal to appearing before a judge and done with everything except sentencing in the space of about three hours.  Again, totally unheard of.

So, as we're discussing the current podcasts, I'd prefer to discuss the podcasts with people that have heard the thing I'm talking about.  Therefore, with utmost respect, I'm not going to engage further with you on this.


Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 15, 2015, 02:21:37 PM
Belgarath:

The last Undisclosed Podcast makes me feel a lot better about Jay's lawyer. . . .She seems to be genuinely a good person. Also seems to be a straight shooter, not somebody under the thumb of the prosecution.

Second, I fine it extremely interesting as well that Jen was driving the car when Jay was arrested for resisting arrest and disorderly conduct. Might not mean anything but still extremely interesting.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 15, 2015, 03:15:30 PM
Belg, my issue is that the Undisclosed fans here keep expressing approval for conjectures laid out in the podcast, and then y'all get mad at me when I ask for evidence.

I want to play, I really do--let me play!

What's an episode that contains particularly strong evidence? I'll try again, give it another listen. Maybe I'll come up with something to argue with, maybe I'll change my mind--but I really want to know what evidence is being presented here (not just the conclusions).
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on September 15, 2015, 05:34:26 PM
Desert Fox's most recent post doesn't quote anything or present any evidence, but makes the case (again) that Jay was threatened by the police.

Desert Fox and Belgarath are talking about the inconsistencies with Don's work records as if the only possibility is that they were used to cover something up.

I'm confuzzled.

Undisclosed seems to be really good at making up conjecture that sounds great to those that want Adnan to be innocent...

How do you get from DF post to what Undisclosed is claiming?  My question is twofold: Which of Undisclosed assertion(s) do you think is "making up conjecture that sounds great to those that want Adnan to be innocent", and Why do you think that particular assertion(s) is "made up"?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 15, 2015, 05:36:44 PM
In the spirit of discussion, I'd like to refer to my previous post: if I'm judging Undisclosed unfairly, I'd like to know it. Anybody/everybody, please suggest an episode of Undisclosed in which strong evidenced claims are made, I'd like to listen to that.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on September 15, 2015, 05:41:39 PM
In the spirit of discussion, I'd like to refer to my previous post: if I'm judging Undisclosed unfairly, I'd like to know it. Anybody/everybody, please suggest an episode of Undisclosed in which strong evidenced claims are made, I'd like to listen to that.

You are judging it unfairly, because you are poising the well, and letting your biases set your opinion.  I am kinda with Belg on this one.  It's like we are here to talk about a TV show, and you hate the lead actress and keep coming in to say how awful the TV show is.  When asked why you answer "LOL I don't watch that awful show, why don't you tell me why you think its so great."

So we do and then you say "LOL I expected as much from a bunch of people who like such a crappy show."

So we go on discussing the show then one week later here you come again with "Man that show sucks"

Sorry Lucy, but I am tired of trying to kick that football.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 15, 2015, 05:44:26 PM
So... any good episodes to recommend?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 15, 2015, 05:53:28 PM
In the spirit of discussion, I'd like to refer to my previous post: if I'm judging Undisclosed unfairly, I'd like to know it. Anybody/everybody, please suggest an episode of Undisclosed in which strong evidenced claims are made, I'd like to listen to that.

Imagine discussing a Teaching Company lecture and asking which episode encapsulates all of it?

With both Undisclosed and Serial Dynasty, they have also discovered things while making episodes
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 15, 2015, 06:01:28 PM
In the spirit of discussion, I'd like to refer to my previous post: if I'm judging Undisclosed unfairly, I'd like to know it. Anybody/everybody, please suggest an episode of Undisclosed in which strong evidenced claims are made, I'd like to listen to that.

Imagine discussing a Teaching Company lecture and asking which episode encapsulates all of it?

With both Undisclosed and Serial Dynasty, they have also discovered things while making episodes

I'm not asking for "encapsulates all of it," I'm asking for, "an episode that contains some evidence you find convincing." Pretty please!
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on September 15, 2015, 06:08:00 PM
I'm not asking for "encapsulates all of it," I'm asking for, "an episode that contains some evidence you find convincing." Pretty please!

Why?  Whats the point?  I feel like you want us to curate this information for you so you can attribute our picks to where we are on the issue with Adnan.  If you are not willing to engage in the material then why should we do the work for you.  Especially when this was done before, and you dismissed the podcast without engaging in the evidence, and poisoning the well.

Once again, I am not going to attempt to kick that ball again, Lucy. 

Either you are interested enough to engage the material, or you are not.  And if you are not then expect to get dismissed as not having engaged in the material.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 15, 2015, 06:25:02 PM
Why?  Whats the point?

To help me out.

Quote
I feel like you want us to curate this information for you so you can attribute our picks to where we are on the issue with Adnan. 

Since nobody is willing to post evidence from the podcast in the thread (which is the source of most of my criticism), I want to find out if there is actually evidence presented within the podcast. If you're saying there is not, then cool.

Quote
If you are not willing to engage in the material then why should we do the work for you.  Especially when this was done before, and you dismissed the podcast without engaging in the evidence, and poisoning the well.

I have been happily engaging in this material. It is NOT fair to say I dismissed the podcast without engaging in the evidence, because I listened, I posted the points for discussion, and nobody had a problem with what I said, only that "it wasn't a very strong episode" that I chose. So I'm asking for what you consider to be a strong episode.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on September 15, 2015, 06:26:51 PM
Why?  Whats the point?

To help me out.

Quote
I feel like you want us to curate this information for you so you can attribute our picks to where we are on the issue with Adnan. 

Since nobody is willing to post evidence from the podcast in the thread (which is the source of most of my criticism), I want to find out if there is actually evidence presented within the podcast. If you're saying there is not, then cool.

Quote
If you are not willing to engage in the material then why should we do the work for you.  Especially when this was done before, and you dismissed the podcast without engaging in the evidence, and poisoning the well.

I have been happily engaging in this material. It is NOT fair to say I dismissed the podcast without engaging in the evidence, because I listened, I posted the points for discussion, and nobody had a problem with what I said, only that "it wasn't a very strong episode" that I chose. So I'm asking for what you consider to be a strong episode.

Sorry man, I got enough work to do.  I am not willing to take on the role of DI's personal serial Tutor and Guidance Councillor.   >:D
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 15, 2015, 06:27:50 PM
Are there any strong episodes?

Are there any episodes that contain evidence?

Why are those questions so difficult to answer in any way but, "sorry bruh, gotta listen to dozens of hours of podcasts if you want to find out."
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 15, 2015, 07:51:27 PM
Hard to give a good answer because each podcast tends to tackle a specific item.

This last Undisclosed show, for example, dealt with the deal that Jay got from the prosecution.
I tend to listen to the podcasts while driving, walking the dog, or doing something else.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on September 15, 2015, 08:11:38 PM
Are there any strong episodes?

Are there any episodes that contain evidence?

Why are those questions so difficult to answer in any way but, "sorry bruh, gotta listen to dozens of hours of podcasts if you want to find out."

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

I made a several good faith efforts, which I do not think were met in kind, and now I no longer give a fuck. 

Sorry if that bugs you.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 15, 2015, 09:28:17 PM
Are there any strong episodes?

Are there any episodes that contain evidence?

Why are those questions so difficult to answer in any way but, "sorry bruh, gotta listen to dozens of hours of podcasts if you want to find out."

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

I made a several good faith efforts, which I do not think were met in kind, and now I no longer give a fuck. 

Sorry if that bugs you.

I think your good faith effort was lacking, but it's all good man. No hard feelings.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on September 15, 2015, 09:44:33 PM
I think your good faith effort was lacking, but it's all good man. No hard feelings.

So then its a good thing I am not asking a favor from you.  See my point?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 15, 2015, 09:50:50 PM
I think your good faith effort was lacking, but it's all good man. No hard feelings.

So then its a good thing I am not asking a favor from you.  See my point?

Maybe that we each think each other's effort is lacking?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 15, 2015, 10:03:46 PM

Belgarath:

The last Undisclosed Podcast makes me feel a lot better about Jay's lawyer. . . .She seems to be genuinely a good person. Also seems to be a straight shooter, not somebody under the thumb of the prosecution.

Second, I fine it extremely interesting as well that Jen was driving the car when Jay was arrested for resisting arrest and disorderly conduct. Might not mean anything but still extremely interesting.


Yes,

This I agree with.   As Susan said in the episode. It seems that she was a good person placed in a terrible position by Kevin Urick.   Essentially she was given the choice of defending Jay or walking and letting him be charged with capital murder.   
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on September 15, 2015, 10:11:20 PM

Belgarath:

The last Undisclosed Podcast makes me feel a lot better about Jay's lawyer. . . .She seems to be genuinely a good person. Also seems to be a straight shooter, not somebody under the thumb of the prosecution.

Second, I fine it extremely interesting as well that Jen was driving the car when Jay was arrested for resisting arrest and disorderly conduct. Might not mean anything but still extremely interesting.
Yes,

This I agree with.   As Susan said in the episode. It seems that she was a good person placed in a terrible position by Kevin Urick.   Essentially she was given the choice of defending Jay or walking and letting him be charged with capital murder.

Didn't they even have the picture of the Charge sheet where Jay was being charged with murder?

So on the timeline, did they tell Jay what to say, and then when Jay got uncomfortable with what he was doing and asked for a lawyer then did they charge him with murder? 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 15, 2015, 11:01:04 PM
I don't recall that.   What happened is that they interviewed neighbor boy and neighbor boy said that Jay wasn't going to testify.   This worried the cops because Jay was their entire case.   The very next day Jay was at the prosecutors office and between 9am and noon the entire plea deal was completed.  Including getting Jay a lawyer. 
Title: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 15, 2015, 11:01:53 PM
I thought Jay was convicted of a lesser crime than murder.  Was he charged with murder?   I thought it was something less than that. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 16, 2015, 02:08:27 AM
I thought Jay was convicted of a lesser crime than murder.  Was he charged with murder?   I thought it was something less than that.

I just listened to the latest Undisclosed again. . . .According to Susan, she spoke to Anne Benaroya, Jay's attorney, and that she had been told that if Jay did not plead, he would be kicked over to Baltimore Country and would be charged with first degree murder. The DA of Baltimore County at that time always went for the death penalty and juries were usually white.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on September 16, 2015, 11:46:52 PM
I thought Jay was convicted of a lesser crime than murder.  Was he charged with murder?   I thought it was something less than that.

I just listened to the latest Undisclosed again. . . .According to Susan, she spoke to Anne Benaroya, Jay's attorney, and that she had been told that if Jay did not plead, he would be kicked over to Baltimore Country and would be charged with first degree murder. The DA of Baltimore County at that time always went for the death penalty and juries were usually white.
Yeah, the thing about this is that there's always a veneer of plausible deniability. If there wasn't, Urich would have been disbarred and the officers would have been fired. That being said, it really does look exactly like what happened is:

1. Jay submitted an anonymous tip via "Crimestoppers" to sell out an acquaintance to perhaps buy a new motorbike.
2. The police get this tip and pursue the tipper, also at the exact same time they learned about the tip shutting down all other avenues of potential murderers.
3. The police narrow in on Adnan because where there's smoke there's got to be fire, right? And Jay's story makes no sense.
4. The police feed Jay a cooked story that more or less fits with the facts as the police know them. They're good enough at this that they don't actually say anything on the record but there's a ton of suspicious stuff, and plus Jay's story keeps changing.
5. Some time a few months later, Jay gets cold feet and the prosecution scares him into compliance by advising him that as an accessory he can in fact be convicted of Murder 1, and since the crime happened in Baltimore County, it could get kicked out to the county courts, who are notoriously rough on black people and potential murderers. The prosecution doesn't actually want Jay to fry, of course, so he finds a "true believer" defense attorney who takes one look at the case and implores Jay to take the deal and go back to testifying.
6. At some point in November, the Crimestoppers tip is paid. These tips are only paid out when the tip leads directly to an indictment and there are precious few people in this case who could possibly have delivered this: Jay, the guy who found the body, possibly one of Jay's friends.
7. The trial goes and it appears that the Syed family spent their money poorly, hiring an attorney with a great reputation but who is at this point very sick and skimming a lot of money off the top of her law firm. This isn't conjecture; another case she was trying concurrently resulted in her client being convicted, then the conviction being overturned due to her poor performance. There seems to be clear evidence in this case, too, of her saying that she hired expert witnesses who never appeared and who, if they did exist, might well have broken the case open all by themselves.
8. Even with this incompetence, Adnan style got a mistrial in the first go-round when the prosecution called his attorney a liar in front of the jury. They were apparently winning at the time, according to post-trial interviews with the jurors.
9. The second trial ratchets up the racism, apparently, and Jay's story (I think by this point he's on version #5) is coached up enough that the prosecution wins. Incidentally conservatives here may love the fact that the racism being played to was black anti-Arab (technically I guess that's anti-Semitism but that's confusing) sentiment.
10. Adnan goes to jail and is lost in a sea of people who also claim they're innocent.

That's the gist, I guess. The problem with "oh, listen to this one episode" is that the real force of the argument is all of the evidence. The climate change parallel is a good one; you can cast doubt on one particular study but it isn't one study that's propping up climate change, it's thousands of them. There is a *bit* of difference here in that there aren't literally thousands of things wrong with the case, just dozens, but dozens is still a lot. And yes, law is not science so there is more room for conjecture, but even with that room, there's simply too much evidence that the police narrative is completely bonkers to assume they had anything more than an anonymous tip by an 18 year old kid who wanted a bike and who got a bit in over his head.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 17, 2015, 11:14:20 AM
My issue is with folks saying "it really does look exactly like what happened is" and getting mad when I ask about other equally un/evidenced possibilities that seem just as or more likely to me. I ask for specific episodes because I understand that it's mostly conjecture, and I don't care to listen to that, it's really boring from my perspective... so I was hoping there might be some bits of evidence that are brought up.

J Slick's conjectural timeline sounds totally plausible, but y'all have to agree that it's not the only way it could have happened, right?

I get that the "free Adnan!" podcasts have presented a very convincing case, I'm just saying it doesn't seem like much new evidence has surfaced, and certainly not enough to support claims made in this thread like "it's impossible that Adnan did it."
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 17, 2015, 11:16:16 AM
Johny Slick:
I do not know if Don murdered Hae but he is a much better suspect that Adnan.
1. The day of Hae's murder, his alibi appears to be completely forged.
2. He is called by the police around 1800 and then does not get back to them around 0130, giving an easy window for him to bury the body.
3. Never tried to call her again even though, unlike Adnan, he has no contact with her circle.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 17, 2015, 11:19:35 AM
I get that the "free Adnan!" podcasts have presented a very convincing case, I'm just saying it doesn't seem like much new evidence has surfaced, and certainly not enough to support claims made in this thread like "it's impossible that Adnan did it."

I had somebody post a number of arguments why they think Adnan is guilty. This person is a crime writer and I personally ripped them apart. I am interested in criminal cases and have some PI experience but would be wrong to call me an expert.

Bob Ruff also later interviewed the woman on his show and he did not rip them apart but shredded them (Very politely however.)

She is suppose to the the "A" Game so what does that say?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 17, 2015, 12:54:13 PM
There has been plenty of new evidence and circumstance that have come out:

1) Asia McLean
2) Don's lack of alibi
3) Track time table (where Adnan was almost certainly at track for the whole practice)
4) Jay potentially being the crimestopper's call (need to get that subpoena'ed)
5) Failure of the defense attorney to question or even call Mcgillevery (sp?)
6) Unprecidented interaction between Jay's 'attorney' and the prosecutor
7) The fact that Hae could NOT have been buried when the prosecution says she was
8) The fact that Hae could NOT have been in the trunk for as long as they said she was
9) The fact that Jay's multiple stories were not even pointed out on the witness stand
10) The fact that cell tower evidence does NOT indicate what the prosecution says it does.


This is not a country where you have to prove someone is innocent, although I think when you take it all into account it's pretty clear that he couldn't have done it.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 17, 2015, 12:55:35 PM
Johny Slick:
I do not know if Don murdered Hae but he is a much better suspect that Adnan.
1. The day of Hae's murder, his alibi appears to be completely forged.
2. He is called by the police around 1800 and then does not get back to them around 0130, giving an easy window for him to bury the body.
3. Never tried to call her again even though, unlike Adnan, he has no contact with her circle.

I agree with this.  The order and manner of his funky time cards alone is very troubling though.  If he were running some sort of ongoing scam, why would this only happen for a single week. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 17, 2015, 02:32:25 PM
Johny Slick:
I do not know if Don murdered Hae but he is a much better suspect that Adnan.
1. The day of Hae's murder, his alibi appears to be completely forged.
2. He is called by the police around 1800 and then does not get back to them around 0130, giving an easy window for him to bury the body.
3. Never tried to call her again even though, unlike Adnan, he has no contact with her circle.

I agree with this.  The order and manner of his funky time cards alone is very troubling though.  If he were running some sort of ongoing scam, why would this only happen for a single week.

If his alibi was shot but hadn't disappeared until 0130, be less suspicious.
I forgot one as well - Hae said she was going to see Don
1. The day of Hae's murder, his alibi appears to be completely forged.
2. He is called by the police around 1800 and then does not get back to them around 0130, giving an easy window for him to bury the body.
3. Hae said she was to go see Don
4. Never tried to call her again even though, unlike Adnan, he has no contact with her circle.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on September 17, 2015, 07:45:53 PM
J Slick's conjectural timeline sounds totally plausible, but y'all have to agree that it's not the only way it could have happened, right?
To the extent that I extended the timeline (i.e. there is nothing in there about who I though killed Hae Min Lee because I have no idea), I'd say that, based on the evidence collected, it's probably about a 95% chance that things basically went down that way. No, 95% is not 100%, but this is the real world and 100% never happens.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 17, 2015, 09:32:28 PM
J Slick's conjectural timeline sounds totally plausible, but y'all have to agree that it's not the only way it could have happened, right?
To the extent that I extended the timeline (i.e. there is nothing in there about who I though killed Hae Min Lee because I have no idea), I'd say that, based on the evidence collected, it's probably about a 95% chance that things basically went down that way. No, 95% is not 100%, but this is the real world and 100% never happens.

Really, the only place I disagree is with your 95%.

It's the same issue Belg and I are having... I think there is nowhere near enough evidence (EVIDENCE) to have that much confidence in a hypothetical scenario.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on September 17, 2015, 09:35:27 PM
J Slick's conjectural timeline sounds totally plausible, but y'all have to agree that it's not the only way it could have happened, right?
To the extent that I extended the timeline (i.e. there is nothing in there about who I though killed Hae Min Lee because I have no idea), I'd say that, based on the evidence collected, it's probably about a 95% chance that things basically went down that way. No, 95% is not 100%, but this is the real world and 100% never happens.

Really, the only place I disagree is with your 95%.

It's the same issue Belg and I are having... I think there is nowhere near enough evidence (EVIDENCE) to have that much confidence in a hypothetical scenario.
There is evidence (EVIDENCE) for every point I made.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 17, 2015, 09:40:07 PM
J Slick's conjectural timeline sounds totally plausible, but y'all have to agree that it's not the only way it could have happened, right?
To the extent that I extended the timeline (i.e. there is nothing in there about who I though killed Hae Min Lee because I have no idea), I'd say that, based on the evidence collected, it's probably about a 95% chance that things basically went down that way. No, 95% is not 100%, but this is the real world and 100% never happens.

Really, the only place I disagree is with your 95%.

It's the same issue Belg and I are having... I think there is nowhere near enough evidence (EVIDENCE) to have that much confidence in a hypothetical scenario.
There is evidence (EVIDENCE) for every point I made.

Again, I think we differ on definitions for evidence.

I think those that are buying into the narrative provided by the "Free Adnan!" podcasts are lending way too much credence to circumstantial evidence when it supports their desired result, and ignoring that which doesn't.

I'd love to go point by point, but that's how I angered Belg--so I'll leave that up to you. (start anywhere you like)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on September 17, 2015, 09:47:00 PM
Circumstantial evidence is the better form of evidence that exists. It's eyewitness evidence that is notoriously unreliable.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 17, 2015, 09:49:52 PM
J Slick's conjectural timeline sounds totally plausible, but y'all have to agree that it's not the only way it could have happened, right?
To the extent that I extended the timeline (i.e. there is nothing in there about who I though killed Hae Min Lee because I have no idea), I'd say that, based on the evidence collected, it's probably about a 95% chance that things basically went down that way. No, 95% is not 100%, but this is the real world and 100% never happens.

Really, the only place I disagree is with your 95%.

It's the same issue Belg and I are having... I think there is nowhere near enough evidence (EVIDENCE) to have that much confidence in a hypothetical scenario.
There is evidence (EVIDENCE) for every point I made.

Again, I think we differ on definitions for evidence.

I think those that are buying into the narrative provided by the "Free Adnan!" podcasts are lending way too much credence to circumstantial evidence when it supports their desired result, and ignoring that which doesn't.

Do you have an sources for evidence which supports his guilt? As far as I can tell, the only evidence we have of guilt is Jay Wild's testimony?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 17, 2015, 09:57:32 PM
Do you have an sources for evidence which supports his guilt? As far as I can tell, the only evidence we have of guilt is Jay Wild's testimony?

Adnan is still my pet suspect, but I think there is no evidence for Adnan's guilt.

I'm not arguing for his guilt, I'm arguing against Belg (and anybody else) who thinks it's impossible that Adnan is guilty.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 17, 2015, 09:58:52 PM
Circumstantial evidence is the better form of evidence that exists. It's eyewitness evidence that is notoriously unreliable.

I don't think both are incredibly weak as far as evidence goes, though I agree that eyewitness (memory even moreso) is the worse of the two.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on September 17, 2015, 09:59:49 PM
Circumstantial evidence is just "evidence". All evidence is by its nature circumstantial.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 17, 2015, 10:00:09 PM
Do you have an sources for evidence which supports his guilt? As far as I can tell, the only evidence we have of guilt is Jay Wild's testimony?

Adnan is still my pet suspect, but I think there is no evidence for Adnan's guilt.

I'm not arguing for his guilt, I'm arguing against Belg (and anybody else) who thinks it's impossible that Adnan is guilty.

If you consider him your pet suspect, why?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 17, 2015, 10:05:18 PM
Circumstantial evidence is just "evidence". All evidence is by its nature circumstantial.

If you want to get really pedantic, then I agree: all evidence requires some sort of inference.

All I'm saying is there is no clear evidence for or against anybody in this case. I'm not arguing that Adnan is guilty, I'm arguing against the position that he is definitely innocent.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 17, 2015, 10:08:49 PM
Keep beating the hell out of that straw man if it makes you feel better. 

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 17, 2015, 10:08:57 PM
Circumstantial evidence is just "evidence". All evidence is by its nature circumstantial.

If you want to get really pedantic, then I agree: all evidence requires some sort of inference.

All I'm saying is there is no clear evidence for or against anybody in this case. I'm not arguing that Adnan is guilty, I'm arguing against the position that he is definitely innocent.

I think all of us are arguing that he is no more likely to be guilty than anybody else and less so than some potential suspects (such as Don.)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 17, 2015, 10:24:57 PM
Keep beating the hell out of that straw man if it makes you feel better.

Did you not say exactly that earlier?

I'm perfectly happy to let that go if that wasn't your position, but didn't you say, "Adnan couldn't have done it" earlier? Does that mean something other than the literal meaning of the words?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 18, 2015, 08:32:05 AM
It means the same thing as when I say you couldn't have done it. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 19, 2015, 10:43:27 AM
So as we know, during the week that Hae was murdered, there were several instances where Don had 'clocked in' at both LensCrafters locations.  In some instances he appeared to clock out at one location and in at another location within 20 minutes.  Some guy tried to see if that was possible:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isdEu4M8ims

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 19, 2015, 12:08:45 PM
I notice he is doing 70 in a 60. . . . .That is right on the edge of "might be pulled over" and the max you want to do on the interstate. back roads, it is 5 over.

At the time though, speed limit would likely have been 55. I have seen highways locally raised up to 60 from 55 in the last 5 years or so.

Edit: The Federal limits were repealed in 1995.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 19, 2015, 03:43:39 PM
It means the same thing as when I say you couldn't have done it.

There is much stronger evidence that I couldn't have done it.

I've yet to see any strong evidence that Adnan couldn't have. (a coach's after the fact memory of him being at track the day of the murder is not strong evidence in my opinion)

Hae's friend also definitely absolutely remembers the day Hae disappeared because Hae was supposed to help her keep score at a wrestling match that day. ....except there was no wrestling match that day.

Memory sucks. We cannot rely upon it.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 19, 2015, 03:48:12 PM
How about that Hae's body was buried after at least midnight?
There is no evidence of him having left the house around that time.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 19, 2015, 04:09:21 PM
How about that Hae's body was buried after at least midnight?
There is no evidence of him having left the house around that time.

We know that Hae had livor mortis on her front, and was buried on her side. We don't know when she was killed, but I think "sometime between Hae leaving school and attempting to pick up her cousin from school" is likely, although other possibilities exist.

Quote from: wiki
Livor mortis starts twenty minutes to three hours after death and is congealed in the capillaries in four to five hours. Maximum lividity occurs within 6–12 hours.

So she was prone somewhere for at minimum 4-5 hours, likely 6-12 hours before she was buried. ....that's what we know. That's it. It doesn't mean she was buried that many hours after murder, it means she was buried at minimum that many hours after murder. That's a LOT of time, in which Adnan, or Jay, or Don, or Mr. S, or whomever else could have killed and buried Hae in any number of possible scenarios.

There's just not enough evidence there to implicate or eliminate anybody.
 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 19, 2015, 04:22:03 PM



There is much stronger evidence that I couldn't have done it.



Really?   Produce it so I can rule you out.  Otherwise I have to equally suspect you as anyone else.   
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 19, 2015, 04:26:19 PM



There is much stronger evidence that I couldn't have done it.



Really?   Produce it so I can rule you out.  Otherwise I have to equally suspect you as anyone else.

My band teacher totally remembers that I was in band that day, and probably not late or anything, because we talked about Shostakovich, and cold Russian winters, because it was cold that day, and Jan 13 1999 was a cold day.

Therefor I couldn't have done it!
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 19, 2015, 04:39:34 PM
How about that Hae's body was buried after at least midnight?
There is no evidence of him having left the house around that time.

We know that Hae had livor mortis on her front, and was buried on her side. We don't know when she was killed, but I think "sometime between Hae leaving school and attempting to pick up her cousin from school" is likely, although other possibilities exist.

Quote from: wiki
Livor mortis starts twenty minutes to three hours after death and is congealed in the capillaries in four to five hours. Maximum lividity occurs within 6–12 hours.

So she was prone somewhere for at minimum 4-5 hours, likely 6-12 hours before she was buried. ....that's what we know. That's it. It doesn't mean she was buried that many hours after murder, it means she was buried at minimum that many hours after murder. That's a LOT of time, in which Adnan, or Jay, or Don, or Mr. S, or whomever else could have killed and buried Hae in any number of possible scenarios.

There's just not enough evidence there to implicate or eliminate anybody.

Is it enough evidence to completely eliminate Adnan, no but it is certainly enough to lower him way down in the list.
At the same time, Don not getting back to the police until after 0130 put him higher in the list.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 19, 2015, 05:54:19 PM
How about that Hae's body was buried after at least midnight?
There is no evidence of him having left the house around that time.

We know that Hae had livor mortis on her front, and was buried on her side. We don't know when she was killed, but I think "sometime between Hae leaving school and attempting to pick up her cousin from school" is likely, although other possibilities exist.

Quote from: wiki
Livor mortis starts twenty minutes to three hours after death and is congealed in the capillaries in four to five hours. Maximum lividity occurs within 6–12 hours.

So she was prone somewhere for at minimum 4-5 hours, likely 6-12 hours before she was buried. ....that's what we know. That's it. It doesn't mean she was buried that many hours after murder, it means she was buried at minimum that many hours after murder. That's a LOT of time, in which Adnan, or Jay, or Don, or Mr. S, or whomever else could have killed and buried Hae in any number of possible scenarios.

There's just not enough evidence there to implicate or eliminate anybody.

Is it enough evidence to completely eliminate Adnan, no but it is certainly enough to lower him way down in the list.

Lower him in to the same tier as Don and Mr. S? I agree, if that's what you mean.

Quote
At the same time, Don not getting back to the police until after 0130 put him higher in the list.

Yeah, the lack of evidence for Don's alibi certainly elevates him into that top tier of suspects in my book.

I still like Adnan as the murderer, due to his proximity to Hae at the time somebody needed to stop her from picking up her cousin--but that's just a pet theory, no real evidence.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 19, 2015, 06:13:43 PM
I'm still waiting for your band teacher to post and if the teacher's memory matches the weather and you also were seen at such and such a time on that date then I would put you in the same category.  But you're still up there in my book.  Hell since you don't have anyone else attesting to your presence, you're higher on the list. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 19, 2015, 06:41:53 PM
How about that Hae's body was buried after at least midnight?
There is no evidence of him having left the house around that time.

We know that Hae had livor mortis on her front, and was buried on her side. We don't know when she was killed, but I think "sometime between Hae leaving school and attempting to pick up her cousin from school" is likely, although other possibilities exist.

Quote from: wiki
Livor mortis starts twenty minutes to three hours after death and is congealed in the capillaries in four to five hours. Maximum lividity occurs within 6–12 hours.

So she was prone somewhere for at minimum 4-5 hours, likely 6-12 hours before she was buried. ....that's what we know. That's it. It doesn't mean she was buried that many hours after murder, it means she was buried at minimum that many hours after murder. That's a LOT of time, in which Adnan, or Jay, or Don, or Mr. S, or whomever else could have killed and buried Hae in any number of possible scenarios.

There's just not enough evidence there to implicate or eliminate anybody.

Is it enough evidence to completely eliminate Adnan, no but it is certainly enough to lower him way down in the list.

Lower him in to the same tier as Don and Mr. S? I agree, if that's what you mean.

Quote
At the same time, Don not getting back to the police until after 0130 put him higher in the list.

Yeah, the lack of evidence for Don's alibi certainly elevates him into that top tier of suspects in my book.

I still like Adnan as the murderer, due to his proximity to Hae at the time somebody needed to stop her from picking up her cousin--but that's just a pet theory, no real evidence.

What evidence would be required to remove Adnan from being your pet suspect?

I started as being neutral towards Adnan's guilt. He was going steadily lowering although one item that concerned me was that I had not heard the arguments for guilt. When I had the "A" game for guilt thrown at me and could demolish them myself, that really caused him to plummet on my guilty list.   
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 19, 2015, 10:14:28 PM
Debbie: Sees both Adnan and Hae (completely seperately) between 2:45 and 3:00.  Adnan was in the guidance counselor's office with his gym bag.
Asia:  Sees Adnan in the library after 3:00.  So did her boyfriend.
Coach Sye: Can't be certain about date, but spoke with Adnan on the 13th during track practice.  Spoke about Ramadan and remembers the conversation being outside in warm weather.  Remember, this was INDOOR TRACK and this is the only day in January with outside practice.  Adnan showed up on time and also left on time.  Jan 12 and Jan 13 were the only days in Jan above 40 degrees.  Jan 12 there was a track meet at another school.  Jan 13 is the only possibility. 


Just so I understand your viewpoint, are you contending that the murder happened later?  OR are you contending that Asia, Debbie, and Coach Sye are wrong?




 

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: LacedDecal on September 20, 2015, 08:01:43 AM
Are there any strong episodes?

Are there any episodes that contain evidence?

Why are those questions so difficult to answer in any way but, "sorry bruh, gotta listen to dozens of hours of podcasts if you want to find out."

They are all strong episodes, and they all contain evidence.  Let me lay something out for you:

When Rabia first met with Sarah Koenig in that interview that ended up starting Ep1 of Serial, Rabia brought with her a single box of documents related to the case which, given her thoughts at the time about the case, seemed like the most important.  Serial used this along with interviews and investigative work to produce the podcast. 

But what about the documents that Rabia didn't bring?  There in actuality is ~25 boxes in total, most containing documents, but a few containing actual physical audio tapes and recordings.  The undisclosed team has had access and been using this as their starting point for research. 

In Rabia'a own account, what she thought was really going on way back then, which was guiding her on what to turn over to Sarah, is so 100% radically different than what she knows now.  In addition, the undisclosed team gets new information from Adnan's legal teams private investigator, who has unearthed many new facts that are, to be honest, game changing.  Just recently undisclosed released information on the discovery that a crime stoppers reward of $3075 was paid to someone who made an anonymous tip on Feb 1st.  This was the episode from two weeks ago.

So to answer your question: Every episode is strong. And even more so every episode is CHOCKED full of new information nearly from beginning to end.  The biggest criticism leveled at the show after the first two episodes, was that it was too densely packed with them reading off new information.  Not that the information wasn't interesting, but they went over so many new things rapid fire, and spent almost no time explaining why any of it was relevant.  They didn't elaborate on how the listener should interpret that information, leaving the listener confused.

They've improved that since then, by adding introductory recaps to set the stage before they share new information.  And then after, they will have a conversation-style interaction wherein they explain what THEY take it to mean, and what it indicates.  The show does an incredibly rigorous and honest job of CLEARLY DELINEATING where the information/facts they share ends, and where their own personal interpretation begins. 

I'm going to say ahead of this next thing, that I say this in the most respectful way possible.  The fact that you have only listened to the 12 episodes of Serial, and apparently haven't listened to ANY undisclosed or more recent episodes of Serial Dynasty... In my opinion I think it is absolutely absurd that you continue to post and argue your opinions here on the case in a declarative and imperative tone.  If you were instead inquisitive, sincerely inquisitive, that would be one thing.  But from the content of what you write, as well as your own admission that you haven't listened to practically any Undisclosed, it's clear that the holes in your knowledge of the facts of this case has gotten to the point of absurdity.  Basically it's like your knowledge base is that which we all had immediately after the season finale of Serial. 

Now, all that being said, you clearly are an intelligent person.  I hope you don't react to what I just said in a bitter way, but instead realize that your impression of Undisclosed podcast was totally wrong.  Maybe you go listen to every single episode, and have your mind=blown over and over.  Maybe you decide you don't care that much about the Hae Min Lee murder case.  But either way, I can see why so many people on this thread are getting frustrated.  I last posted here a couple months ago, and you were saying the exact same thing "oh. Well I haven't listened to Undisclosed." Yet every week when the new episode drops, and people start posting here discussing all the brand new information divulged on the new episode, you dominate the thread with strong and definitive opinions on the topic.  The topic which you never bother to listen to or get information on.

Do you feel what I'm saying?


EDIT:  It's like walking in at the end of the third Lord of the Rings movie, and saying "Why can't you simply tell me how all this happened?  I watched the first third of Fellowship.  Why's everyone gotta say 'Sorry bruh, you gotta watch hours of movies to find out.' I don't have hours to watch all three movies. Isn't there like, a single scene, you could point me to which I could watch instead?"
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 20, 2015, 11:34:21 AM
I listened to 1 Undisclosed (you'll find my I think very fair analysis of it many pages back), and I found it to contain nothing but evidence that the police investigation sucked. Which everybody should have already known.

Debbie: Sees both Adnan and Hae (completely seperately) between 2:45 and 3:00.  Adnan was in the guidance counselor's office with his gym bag.
Asia:  Sees Adnan in the library after 3:00.  So did her boyfriend.
Coach Sye: Can't be certain about date, but spoke with Adnan on the 13th during track practice.  Spoke about Ramadan and remembers the conversation being outside in warm weather.  Remember, this was INDOOR TRACK and this is the only day in January with outside practice.  Adnan showed up on time and also left on time.  Jan 12 and Jan 13 were the only days in Jan above 40 degrees.  Jan 12 there was a track meet at another school.  Jan 13 is the only possibility. 


Just so I understand your viewpoint, are you contending that the murder happened later?  OR are you contending that Asia, Debbie, and Coach Sye are wrong?

I think it's possible that some (or all 3) are wrong. People remember things that they want to be true, even if they aren't.

If the coach's memory is accurate, then you're right, Adnan had to be at track that day, but I don't have a lot of faith in memory.

Remember Hae's friend who was 100% positive that the day of the murder, Hae was supposed to help her score at a wrestling match? Only there was no wrestling match that day? Memory sucks.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 20, 2015, 12:05:44 PM
You ignored the second part of the question.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 20, 2015, 03:35:28 PM
I listened to 1 Undisclosed (you'll find my I think very fair analysis of it many pages back), and I found it to contain nothing but evidence that the police investigation sucked. Which everybody should have already known.

The investigation did not suck, it was criminal.  The prosecution hid exonerating evidence from the defense and played other games so that the defense was hamstrung.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on September 20, 2015, 09:05:46 PM
Are there any strong episodes?

Are there any episodes that contain evidence?

Why are those questions so difficult to answer in any way but, "sorry bruh, gotta listen to dozens of hours of podcasts if you want to find out."

They are all strong episodes, and they all contain evidence.  Let me lay something out for you:

When Rabia first met with Sarah Koenig in that interview that ended up starting Ep1 of Serial, Rabia brought with her a single box of documents related to the case which, given her thoughts at the time about the case, seemed like the most important.  Serial used this along with interviews and investigative work to produce the podcast. 

But what about the documents that Rabia didn't bring?  There in actuality is ~25 boxes in total, most containing documents, but a few containing actual physical audio tapes and recordings.  The undisclosed team has had access and been using this as their starting point for research. 

In Rabia'a own account, what she thought was really going on way back then, which was guiding her on what to turn over to Sarah, is so 100% radically different than what she knows now.  In addition, the undisclosed team gets new information from Adnan's legal teams private investigator, who has unearthed many new facts that are, to be honest, game changing.  Just recently undisclosed released information on the discovery that a crime stoppers reward of $3075 was paid to someone who made an anonymous tip on Feb 1st.  This was the episode from two weeks ago.

So to answer your question: Every episode is strong. And even more so every episode is CHOCKED full of new information nearly from beginning to end.  The biggest criticism leveled at the show after the first two episodes, was that it was too densely packed with them reading off new information.  Not that the information wasn't interesting, but they went over so many new things rapid fire, and spent almost no time explaining why any of it was relevant.  They didn't elaborate on how the listener should interpret that information, leaving the listener confused.

They've improved that since then, by adding introductory recaps to set the stage before they share new information.  And then after, they will have a conversation-style interaction wherein they explain what THEY take it to mean, and what it indicates.  The show does an incredibly rigorous and honest job of CLEARLY DELINEATING where the information/facts they share ends, and where their own personal interpretation begins. 

I'm going to say ahead of this next thing, that I say this in the most respectful way possible.  The fact that you have only listened to the 12 episodes of Serial, and apparently haven't listened to ANY undisclosed or more recent episodes of Serial Dynasty... In my opinion I think it is absolutely absurd that you continue to post and argue your opinions here on the case in a declarative and imperative tone.  If you were instead inquisitive, sincerely inquisitive, that would be one thing.  But from the content of what you write, as well as your own admission that you haven't listened to practically any Undisclosed, it's clear that the holes in your knowledge of the facts of this case has gotten to the point of absurdity.  Basically it's like your knowledge base is that which we all had immediately after the season finale of Serial. 

Now, all that being said, you clearly are an intelligent person.  I hope you don't react to what I just said in a bitter way, but instead realize that your impression of Undisclosed podcast was totally wrong.  Maybe you go listen to every single episode, and have your mind=blown over and over.  Maybe you decide you don't care that much about the Hae Min Lee murder case.  But either way, I can see why so many people on this thread are getting frustrated.  I last posted here a couple months ago, and you were saying the exact same thing "oh. Well I haven't listened to Undisclosed." Yet every week when the new episode drops, and people start posting here discussing all the brand new information divulged on the new episode, you dominate the thread with strong and definitive opinions on the topic.  The topic which you never bother to listen to or get information on.

Do you feel what I'm saying?


EDIT:  It's like walking in at the end of the third Lord of the Rings movie, and saying "Why can't you simply tell me how all this happened?  I watched the first third of Fellowship.  Why's everyone gotta say 'Sorry bruh, you gotta watch hours of movies to find out.' I don't have hours to watch all three movies. Isn't there like, a single scene, you could point me to which I could watch instead?"
Thats our DI.  Love him to death, but when he starts with a conclusion and backs into his "facts" he's like pooh stuck in his front door.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 20, 2015, 09:17:19 PM
Well, with the latest Serial Dynasty, whatever the case with Don't timesheets, they are almost certainly a forgery.
Did I misunderstand the program in that they had to have been forged within a week of Hae disappearing (and before her body was found)?
That gets even more ominous?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 21, 2015, 01:02:52 AM
Thats our DI.  Love him to death, but when he starts with a conclusion and backs into his "facts" he's like pooh stuck in his front door.

Which conclusion did I start with?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 21, 2015, 01:03:56 AM
Well, with the latest Serial Dynasty, whatever the case with Don't timesheets, they are almost certainly a forgery.
Did I misunderstand the program in that they had to have been forged within a week of Hae disappearing (and before her body was found)?
That gets even more ominous?

 ::)

We better assume one possibility that aligns with what we want to believe above all other possibilities, right?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 21, 2015, 01:06:53 AM
You ignored the second part of the question.

I thought I addressed all of your post:

We have no evidence that anybody is specifically wrong, but due to the fallibility of memory, we shouldn't assume they're all right, either (since their memories are of unrelated events, and there is no evidence beyond their own memories).

It doesn't mean Adnan is guilty, it just means we can't clear him.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 21, 2015, 01:35:46 AM
Well, with the latest Serial Dynasty, whatever the case with Don't timesheets, they are almost certainly a forgery.
Did I misunderstand the program in that they had to have been forged within a week of Hae disappearing (and before her body was found)?
That gets even more ominous?

 ::)

We better assume one possibility that aligns with what we want to believe above all other possibilities, right?

If I am accurate and he has a forged time sheet only for the week where Hae disappeared, you are arguing that there is a reason for this that is not suspicious  ???
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 21, 2015, 01:48:00 AM
Well, with the latest Serial Dynasty, whatever the case with Don't timesheets, they are almost certainly a forgery.
Did I misunderstand the program in that they had to have been forged within a week of Hae disappearing (and before her body was found)?
That gets even more ominous?

 ::)

We better assume one possibility that aligns with what we want to believe above all other possibilities, right?

If I am accurate and he has a forged time sheet only for the week where Hae disappeared, you are arguing that there is a reason for this that is not suspicious  ???

I'd like to know if the same thing had ever happened before, as I think that "mommy manager" leaving open some loopholes for shoddy record keeping is possible, either for his financial gain (though I'm aware it appears he was under paid for the week in question, which is obviously weird), or for his laziness (violating company protocols to work a buddy's shift without proper record keeping).

These two possibilities seem plausible to me.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 21, 2015, 01:55:39 AM
According to Serial Dynasty, the only time that Don appears to have logged in using this employee number was the week when Hae was murdered. Never used before then and never used afterwards.

Bob Ruff interviewed a former Lenscrafter manager this week and according to her, the record appears to have been forged.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 21, 2015, 02:14:42 AM
This is not targeted at DI but I had a thought

The days which seem to be forged are the day which Hae was murdered and the Saturday afterwards
Looking at weather underground, I note that Saturday was a relatively nice day with temperatures up to 50 degrees with good weather otherwise and no rain.
Assuming it was Don, might he have actually buried Hae's body Saturday and the time sheet was meant to cover his activities?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 21, 2015, 02:24:37 AM
According to Serial Dynasty, the only time that Don appears to have logged in using this employee number was the week when Hae was murdered. Never used before then and never used afterwards.

Bob Ruff interviewed a former Lenscrafter manager this week and according to her, the record appears to have been forged.

That it was forged is I think a given at this point--the questions is: why did he forge it? I don't assume I know the answer.

So he never logged in with that same employee # before or again... but had he ever logged in with employee numbers that were not his? Was there any reason for anybody to do so? To the latter, I think probably... but I wish we had some documentation.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 21, 2015, 10:27:02 AM
That it was forged is I think a given at this point--the questions is: why did he forge it? I don't assume I know the answer.

So he never logged in with that same employee # before or again... but had he ever logged in with employee numbers that were not his? Was there any reason for anybody to do so? To the latter, I think probably... but I wish we had some documentation.

I did not say that he is guilty although I consider it more likely that Don is guilty than Adnan.

In addition, I consider it enough evidence that Don needs to be looked at with a fine tooth comb.  Whatever is going on is certainly pretty strange. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Johnny Slick on September 21, 2015, 11:09:56 AM
I can't gauge who is more guilty than the other, and honestly I really don't care at this point. All I can say for sure is that the state's case just plain doesn't work, and that it's been 16 years so the chances of finding the real killer are slim to none.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 21, 2015, 11:17:55 AM
I can't gauge who is more guilty than the other, and honestly I really don't care at this point. All I can say for sure is that the state's case just plain doesn't work, and that it's been 16 years so the chances of finding the real killer are slim to none.

I would argue that slim has left the building.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on September 21, 2015, 11:20:50 AM
I was listening to "Jay's Day". There's so much minutae of detail it's really, really hard to follow. However, my take away seems to be the simplified story that Jay went to the cops, had all these details, and then the cops followed up the details is just an incorrect narrative.

It seems to me: GF goes missing, who is your suspect? The ex BF. Can the ex just move and bury a body on his own? Probably not. He must have had help. Who would likely help him? The black kid friend known to the cops? Bring him in. Threaten all kinds of stuff unless he starts backing the cop's theory.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 21, 2015, 11:51:00 AM
That's close, mindme but it's much more than that. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on September 21, 2015, 12:15:31 PM
Refresh me. Did they find the body before they found her missing car? (Which Jay ostensibly led them to.)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 21, 2015, 12:31:24 PM
The body was found before the car. 
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 21, 2015, 12:50:50 PM
That it was forged is I think a given at this point--the questions is: why did he forge it? I don't assume I know the answer.

So he never logged in with that same employee # before or again... but had he ever logged in with employee numbers that were not his? Was there any reason for anybody to do so? To the latter, I think probably... but I wish we had some documentation.

In addition, I consider it enough evidence that Don needs to be looked at with a fine tooth comb.  Whatever is going on is certainly pretty strange.

Agreed.

Quote
I did not say that he is guilty although I consider it more likely that Don is guilty than Adnan.

We can each have our little pet theories, it doesn't anger me that yours is different than mine.  ;)
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on September 21, 2015, 01:50:46 PM
This contemporary report indicates Lee's car was not far from where her body was found:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkUhKIuawTQ

Wouldn't the cops start a search in the area around her body looking for her missing car? Wouldn't you expect the cops to find it on their own?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 21, 2015, 02:06:55 PM
The car was within about a mile of the body
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=zERAsrjje-sU.kQFffQE6h2vk

Just scroll inwards.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 21, 2015, 02:10:16 PM
We can each have our little pet theories, it doesn't anger me that yours is different than mine.  ;)

One has to be willing to change your theories as time goes on.
I first thought Don might be the murderer
Later, I thought is was extremely unlikely
Now that his alibi has been show to be fraudulent, he is more likely than even what I though originally.
New evidence comes in, my position will change.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 21, 2015, 02:22:17 PM
We can each have our little pet theories, it doesn't anger me that yours is different than mine.  ;)

One has to be willing to change your theories as time goes on.
I first thought Don might be the murderer
Later, I thought is was extremely unlikely
Now that his alibi has been show to be fraudulent, he is more likely than even what I though originally.
New evidence comes in, my position will change.

I'm still stuck in the "not enough evidence to take a position" camp.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Belgarath on September 21, 2015, 02:27:32 PM

I'm still stuck in the "not enough evidence to take a position" camp.

Hmm, that's a change.  Before your pet theory was that Adnan did it, but that there wasn't enough evidence to prove it in a court of law.  IMPROVEMENT!



Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 21, 2015, 02:30:03 PM

I'm still stuck in the "not enough evidence to take a position" camp.

Hmm, that's a change.  Before your pet theory was that Adnan did it, but that there wasn't enough evidence to prove it in a court of law.  IMPROVEMENT!

No change... I've been saying the same thing for a gazillion pages: there's really no evidence for or against anybody, but Adnan is indeed the probable killer in my conjecture-based pet theory.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 21, 2015, 02:42:15 PM
No change... I've been saying the same thing for a gazillion pages: there's really no evidence for or against anybody, but Adnan is indeed the probable killer in my conjecture-based pet theory.

Do you realize that for her age group, there is only about a 20% chance that a woman who is murdered was actually murdered by a man whom she has sexual relations with?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 21, 2015, 02:45:22 PM
No change... I've been saying the same thing for a gazillion pages: there's really no evidence for or against anybody, but Adnan is indeed the probable killer in my conjecture-based pet theory.

Do you realize that for her age group, there is only about a 20% chance that a woman who is murdered was actually murdered by a man whom she has sexual relations with?

 ???
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 21, 2015, 02:58:23 PM
You seem to be arguing that Adnan is the likely suspect because he is the ex-boyfriend. Statically that does not really hold up.   
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 21, 2015, 03:01:12 PM
You seem to be arguing that Adnan is the likely suspect because he is the ex-boyfriend. Statically that does not really hold up.

Really? I don't think that, and I've never said anything to suggest it; which of my posts are you referring to?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 21, 2015, 03:10:45 PM
You seem to be arguing that Adnan is the likely suspect because he is the ex-boyfriend. Statically that does not really hold up.

Really? I don't think that, and I've never said anything to suggest it; which of my posts are you referring to?

What you seem to be arguing then is that you think Adnan is likely guilty but it is based on absolutely nothing?
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 21, 2015, 03:20:57 PM
You seem to be arguing that Adnan is the likely suspect because he is the ex-boyfriend. Statically that does not really hold up.

Really? I don't think that, and I've never said anything to suggest it; which of my posts are you referring to?

What you seem to be arguing then is that you think Adnan is likely guilty but it is based on absolutely nothing?

I've explained why he's my favorite suspect a couple times already, but since you apparently don't actually read my posts, I'll do it again.  :P

I don't think there is solid evidence for or against anybody in this case. Not enough to clear anybody, and not enough to point a finger at anybody.

After acknowledging that, it can be fun to play the "whodunnit" game based on our own pet theories, and what little evidence that exists. My favorite suspect is Adnan, due to his proximity to Hae at the moment things started going wrong her for her, as well as the possibility that Jay was involved, and fed the police a BS story to cover up his own involvement with the actual murder. I personally find that more likely than him having nothing to do with Hae's murder.

I think its fun to play the conjecture game, and talk about why we think each others' theories are or are not likely... but some folks in here seem to have latched on to their own pet theories so tight that they refuse to acknowledge any other possibilities.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: mindme on September 21, 2015, 03:54:52 PM
Five minutes into ep 1 I thought "his parents killed her." But that went no where. My thinking is that killer Ronald Lee Moore did it. Wasn't there some weird ass bottle of hootch found near her body? It sure seemed like something some guy out of prison recently might down.

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 21, 2015, 04:09:50 PM
Five minutes into ep 1 I thought "his parents killed her." But that went no where. My thinking is that killer Ronald Lee Moore did it. Wasn't there some weird ass bottle of hootch found near her body? It sure seemed like something some guy out of prison recently might down.

There were several killers of young women known to have been wandering that area. . . .They seem to like Baltimore for some reason.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on September 21, 2015, 05:53:19 PM
Maybe because you can literally get away with murder there.
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 21, 2015, 05:56:57 PM
Maybe because you can literally get away with murder there.

They just pin it on the first black or Islamic guy they can find. . . . .
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on September 21, 2015, 06:02:51 PM
Maybe because you can literally get away with murder there.

They just pin it on the first black or Islamic guy they can find. . . . .

Yeah.

I mean I want to be clear.  I totally don't actually believe that, especially if I am pressed for details.  Still, I am entirely comfortable stating that outright, then walking it back when shown how silly an idea it is. 

Then give me a page or two and I'll say it again!
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Desert Fox on September 21, 2015, 06:28:01 PM
I believe if they have a ready made suspect, especially if the person is from a minority, they are more than happy to cut corners and play games.

This has been born out by a former cop from the Baltimore PD
Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: PANTS! on September 21, 2015, 07:22:47 PM
Thats our DI.  Love him to death, but when he starts with a conclusion and backs into his "facts" he's like pooh stuck in his front door.

Which conclusion did I start with?

Let me be 100% clear.  I do not actually think that you started with a particular conclusion in this thread.

However, "I think its fun to play the conjecture game, and talk about why we think each others' theories are or are not likely"

Title: Re: Serial Podcast (WARNING: THE DUDE ABIDES)
Post by: Drunken Idaho on September 21, 2015, 10:27:45 PM
Thats our DI.  Love him to death, but when he