4 ms·

Much like the Steven Avery case, this case was poorly prosecuted and defended. The case the State brought was unlikely that what actually happened. In the Steve

• emsy 9y ago
  Yeah the question should really be if he's guilty beyond reasonable doubt, to which the answer can only be no.
• Kylekramer 9y ago
  What was poor about it? All my research into the case show that the prosecution was fairly above board and comprehensive. Syed had motive, means, and opportunity. There was physical evidence, a pattern of Syed lying to police and a confessing accomplice who had information the police didn't. Real tragedy in this case how the justice system can be so easily manipulated by the media.
  • rogerb 9y ago
    The police coaching ? The witness lying about, well, pretty much anything ? The defense not calling critical witnesses ? Or pointing out timelines that can't work ?
    • Kylekramer 9y ago
      Murder accomplices tend to be liars. There isn't any compelling evidence of police coaching. The "critical witness" the defense failed to call disappeared for 15 years, and came back with a cash in book deal in tow once the case was popular again. The timeline wasn't perfectly nailed down, but that isn't a prereq of a murder conviction.
      • rogerb 9y ago
        There's virtually nothing that Jay asserted in his first interview that stands in his 3rd or 4th. Magically it lined up with the State's case. For me that's an issue more than a blanket 'boys will be boys' statement. AFAIK Asia didn't dissapear but was never called/pursued, and the notes on which her testimony is based predates the tv show by more than 10 years. I agree with your timeline statement, and with the fact that media distorts things a lot as well.
  • p49k 9y ago
    There was no physical evidence in the case.
    • Kylekramer 9y ago
      Syed's fingerprints were in the victim's car, no other suspects were.
      • rogerb 9y ago
        He was her boyfriend and had been in the car many times. I may sound like I'm defending Adnan, but I am not. I just don't think that the case was well prosecuted and or defended, which is either now allowing a killer to walk free or an innocent person to have spend years in jail for something he didnt do.
      • p49k 9y ago
        His fingerprints were on a map in her car. He was her boyfriend, so it’s no surprise that some of his fingerprints would be there. It has no actual connection to anything related to the murder. I spent some time looking into this case as well and came to the conclusion that there is simply not enough information to definitively conclude anything, and that people seem too eager to take several leaps of faith to assume he’s guilty. He very well may be, but it isn’t close to being proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Every piece of evidence used to convict him is sketchy in some way.
        • Kylekramer 9y ago
          The mind can always come up with an innocent explanation if it wants to see that. He had been an ex-boyfriend for nearly a month, and no other suspects had fingerprints in the car. Not sure how you believe people are too eager to see him as guilty when the only reason anyone knows about him is a campaign to free him.
          • dbasedweeb 9y ago
            You're really certain about something you can't possibly be certain about, but putting that aside, you're also misreading motives for interest in his case by many. I don't know if he's guilty or not, I just care that our justice system holds itself to an acceptable standard, which it did not in this case. "Ah reckon" isn't the standard, but "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is. "Who else could have done it" is a poor standard, and yet the one that seems to have been employed in this case. For people who care about how the system works, or doesn't work, this is an important distinction. In essence, it has little to do with the guy himself, and more to do with how the system failed him. If he's guilty, lets actually prove it as we're supposed to, and then we can all get on with our lives.