5 ms·

I'll be honest and say I found the podcast rather frustrating. Koenig was clearly an outsider to the legal system, and had the benefit of telling a different,

I'll be honest and say I found the podcast rather frustrating. Koenig was clearly an outsider to the legal system, and had the benefit of telling a different, big long narrative. But at the end of it, I don't know if it was any more or less truthful than the first one. It was still built on old memories, circumstantial evidence, and bias (she even admitted she only started the investigation because she found Adnan so charming). And the interview with Jay after the podcast especially scrambled my thoughts - I found him really compelling too! And there was a lot of stuff the podcast left out without telling you! Over 12 episodes! So in the end, I honestly don't know about Adnan! I don't know if the case against him was actually weak or if there was just enough of an army of hole pokers who could have poked through anything.

shishy 4y ago
> One of the suspects had threatened Lee, saying “he would make her (Ms. Lee) disappear. He would kill her,” according to the filing. > “Given the stunning lack of reliable evidence implicating Mr. Syed, coupled with increasing evidence pointing to other suspects, this unjust conviction cannot stand,” said Assistant Public Defender Erica Suter, Mr. Syed’s attorney and, Director of the Innocence Project Clinic. “Mr. Syed is grateful that this information has finally seen the light of day and looks forward to his day in court.” > The suspects were known persons at the time of the original investigation and were not properly ruled out nor disclosed to the defense, prosecutors said. source: https://apnews.com/article/adnan-syed-conviction-baltimore-prosecutors-c6ee72fa85c79c1bdf7b5486ea762010 https://apnews.com/article/adnan-syed-conviction-baltimore-p... I think this is enough to justify letting him get out and they can decide if they want to do another trial. That's a pretty important miss on the prosecutors originally and the other suspects should have been ruled out before focusing all on him. EDIT: Also, on a personal level and in a normative sense, it's been 20 years and he should be allowed to re-enter society and of all the crazy people we let back, he's probably one of the safer choices for rehabilitation.
- legitster 4y ago
  I would love to hear from an actual neutral legal party if that's actually the case. Adnan had a motive and a strong testimony against him from an accomplice who's story had checked out. Is it actually a big miss to not rule out every possible suspect? But on your broader point, I largely agree that anyone freed from unnecessarily long and potentially unjust prison sentences is a good thing.
  - stingrae 4y ago
    > "accomplice who's story had checked out" I'm not sure that's how i would put it. He changed his story several times until it fit.
    - legitster 4y ago
      The first few times police interviewed him he thought they were going to go after him on drug charges. After he had a plea deal and a lawyer his story was pretty straight. He even pointed out where the evidence was. And this is the testimony that was offered to the jury and scrutinized on cross examination. The entire sub-plot in the podcast about his testimony was somewhat misleading on Serial's part.
      - Calavar 4y ago
        I don't find that to be a very convincing argument. His story could have become more consistent because he stopped lying, or it could have become more consistent because he had more practice telling his lie. Lying is hard at first, but once you've gone through a few takes and once you have the advice of a lawyer to keep you from saying anything stupid, it becomes much easier to tell a coherent story.
  - tunesmith 4y ago
    Jay's story "checked out" because it matched the cell phone evidence and also the testimony of another witness. The problem was that the cell phone evidence was later proven to be completely misinterpreted, and the other witness's testimony apparently misremembered the day (it was something along the lines of her being in class at a certain key time). Without those, it sounds like there's nothing left for his story to rest on.

shishy 4y ago

> One of the suspects had threatened Lee, saying “he would make her (Ms. Lee) disappear. He would kill her,” according to the filing. > “Given the stunning lack of reliable evidence implicating Mr. Syed, coupled with increasing evidence pointing to other suspects, this unjust conviction cannot stand,” said Assistant Public Defender Erica Suter, Mr. Syed’s attorney and, Director of the Innocence Project Clinic. “Mr. Syed is grateful that this information has finally seen the light of day and looks forward to his day in court.” > The suspects were known persons at the time of the original investigation and were not properly ruled out nor disclosed to the defense, prosecutors said. source: https://apnews.com/article/adnan-syed-conviction-baltimore-prosecutors-c6ee72fa85c79c1bdf7b5486ea762010 https://apnews.com/article/adnan-syed-conviction-baltimore-p... I think this is enough to justify letting him get out and they can decide if they want to do another trial. That's a pretty important miss on the prosecutors originally and the other suspects should have been ruled out before focusing all on him. EDIT: Also, on a personal level and in a normative sense, it's been 20 years and he should be allowed to re-enter society and of all the crazy people we let back, he's probably one of the safer choices for rehabilitation.

legitster 4y ago
I would love to hear from an actual neutral legal party if that's actually the case. Adnan had a motive and a strong testimony against him from an accomplice who's story had checked out. Is it actually a big miss to not rule out every possible suspect? But on your broader point, I largely agree that anyone freed from unnecessarily long and potentially unjust prison sentences is a good thing.
- stingrae 4y ago
  > "accomplice who's story had checked out" I'm not sure that's how i would put it. He changed his story several times until it fit.
  - legitster 4y ago
    The first few times police interviewed him he thought they were going to go after him on drug charges. After he had a plea deal and a lawyer his story was pretty straight. He even pointed out where the evidence was. And this is the testimony that was offered to the jury and scrutinized on cross examination. The entire sub-plot in the podcast about his testimony was somewhat misleading on Serial's part.
    - Calavar 4y ago
      I don't find that to be a very convincing argument. His story could have become more consistent because he stopped lying, or it could have become more consistent because he had more practice telling his lie. Lying is hard at first, but once you've gone through a few takes and once you have the advice of a lawyer to keep you from saying anything stupid, it becomes much easier to tell a coherent story.
- tunesmith 4y ago
  Jay's story "checked out" because it matched the cell phone evidence and also the testimony of another witness. The problem was that the cell phone evidence was later proven to be completely misinterpreted, and the other witness's testimony apparently misremembered the day (it was something along the lines of her being in class at a certain key time). Without those, it sounds like there's nothing left for his story to rest on.