|
I think she's trolling reddit, which is awesome.
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 17:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 02:20 |
|
|
Maybe I've been tainted by way too many wrongfully convicted docs (Central Park Five, anyone?) but I would hang a jury on this case. There is no way I've been shown beyond a reasonable doubt that Adnan Sayed killed Hae. Jay's testimony is just noise. We know he is at least an accessory because he knew where Hae's car is. That pollutes his motives and from that point it is simple to see how he could be minimizing his role/another person's role by fingering the most convenient person as the killer, Adnan. Plus he's getting mega-favors from the prosecution since he is the ONLY way they convict Adnan. Combine that with his inconsistencies on record and I give his testimony no credit at all. This is an easy "not guilty" for me. I can't show how Adnan could not kill Hae but that's not what is supposed to put people in jail. Yet, in fact it seems like that is exactly what happened to Adnan Sayed. (I'm not calling out anyone here trying to figure out their own theories for their own sake, I just take the point of view of a juror looking for reasonable doubt on stuff like this)
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
Polish Avenger posted:Maybe I've been tainted by way too many wrongfully convicted docs (Central Park Five, anyone?) but I would hang a jury on this case. They even had a former juror on the case state that they took his decision not to take the stand as a strike against him, which is 100% the opposite of what you are supposed to do when deliberating. They really hosed it up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
I knew that Adnan's lawyer had problems, given that that was the impetus for Serial in the first place, but I had no idea this case could somehow become even more hosed up. It's easy now to see how Adnan ended up in prison for life.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
Max posted:They even had a former juror on the case state that they took his decision not to take the stand as a strike against him, which is 100% the opposite of what you are supposed to do when deliberating. They really hosed it up. I'm not sure I've ever heard juror commentary that made them sound anything but credulous morons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
Isn't it generally accepted that juries (in all countries, I'm speaking as a Brit) are pretty terrible? Simply because no matter who you are, in those circumstances, you can't dispassionately analyse the evidence, especially after you've just seen what amounts to a show attempting to emotionally sway you to one side or the other. I'm not saying I can think of anything better, just that what we have isn't exactly great.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
CottonWolf posted:Isn't it generally accepted that juries (in all countries, I'm speaking as a Brit) are pretty terrible? Simply because no matter who you are, in those circumstances, you can't dispassionately analyse the evidence, especially after you've just seen what amounts to a show attempting to emotionally sway you to one side or the other. I'm not saying I can think of anything better, just that what we have isn't exactly great. I don't know about all juries. It seems like they work most of the time because exonerations are a relatively small number compared to convictions. There are systemic frictions here, and the number should be much higher, but even if exonerations are twice their current number that still doesn't amount to a whole lot. Sure, patent trials in the USA are bogus because they are all tried in one Texas district, which plaintiff research on "LOL Demographics" must have shown the most favorable pool of jurors, but that's only patent troll poo poo. I think with 12 or so people in a jury you should get a relatively random sample of inherent biases and self-delusion that it shouldn't amount to a problem when the jury tries to reach a verdict. I have a feeling that this was a very unlikely pool of jurors that were predisposed in similar ways so as to reach a guilty on some weak evidence. It CAN happen but it most likely won't. Most generally I agree that jurors on their own aren't very qualified or very good at the job they are given, but I think that the hope is they will be differently bad in random ways that won't influence the outcome significantly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
Polish Avenger posted:Maybe I've been tainted by way too many wrongfully convicted docs (Central Park Five, anyone?) but I would hang a jury on this case. This is exactly where I'm at. Like, literally the only two hard facts in the whole case are that Hae was murdered and that Jay knew where the car was. Every shred of evidence against Adnan, as damning as they may seem taken together, are circumstantial at best.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
However we all know that the cell phone calls and tower reception logs don't match up. If that was never said at trial and the attorney showed that she doesn't seem to know how cell phones work, it would be a very different story for the jury.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
I will say it's easy for outsiders to to say they would vote one way or another in a trial, but we have the benefit of having all the information presented to us in tasty, bite sized nuggets. We also have more information than the jury does. It's hard to say what we would have thought if we were given limited information and two voices vying for our attention.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
Juries are bogus because the average American is a loving idiot that has a hard time understanding the concept of "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt."
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
Polish Avenger posted:I think with 12 or so people in a jury you should get a relatively random sample That doesn't really work given racism and xenophobia being as endemic as they are and given any prosecutor being just fine with a jury pre-biased against the defendant.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 23:55
|
|
|
Human posted:I will say it's easy for outsiders to to say they would vote one way or another in a trial, but we have the benefit of having all the information presented to us in tasty, bite sized nuggets. We also have more information than the jury does. It's hard to say what we would have thought if we were given limited information and two voices vying for our attention. Also imaaaaaaaagine that one of those voiiiiiiiiiices is Christina Gutierrrrrrrrrrez, who places undue nasal emmmmmmmphasis every four of five wooooooooords. I can't believe this woman was a successful attorney, if that was her regular style. Were I a juror hearing her argue a case, those speech patterns alone would poise me to convict. Pretty big bombshell regarding the circumstances of Adnan's appeals case, I wasn't aware that a plea deal was ever in consideration. Every time I feel like this series is winding down, another wrinkle pops up to sustain it. Here's a website in defense of Zach Witman, the other Gutierrez case that Koenig said was one of the most gruesome, tragic things she'd ever heard. It's another absolutely bonkers (And, sure enough, incredibly sad) true crime story that could well be fertile ground for a second season. If nothing else, I think now I'd like to see Serial become a series that focuses on genuinely mysterious true crime stories that also highlights the negligence and malfeasance of the American justice system.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
When his lawyer was talking to Jay I completely lost focus on what she was talking about. I can't even imagine 5 days of that. The way Jay was given a lawyer was extremely fishy however (and he got zero jail time  )JethroMcB posted:Here's a website in defense of Zach Witman, the other Gutierrez case that Koenig said was one of the most gruesome, tragic things she'd ever heard. It's another absolutely bonkers (And, sure enough, incredibly sad) true crime story that could well be fertile ground for a second season. If nothing else, I think now I'd like to see Serial become a series that focuses on genuinely mysterious true crime stories that also highlights the negligence and malfeasance of the American justice system.  That's insane. I agree they could do an entire season on that Witman case and the insanities of the justice system.
PaganGoatPants fucked around with this message at 00:37 on Dec 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 00:34
|
|
|
JethroMcB posted:If nothing else, I think now I'd like to see Serial become a series that focuses on genuinely mysterious true crime stories that also highlights the negligence and malfeasance of the American justice system. I'm totally willing to consider Serial making its Season 2 another case — anything to keep people remembering how totally screwed up the policing/judicial system is, as well as those cases where convicted juveniles grow up, and live, in prison for the rest of their lives. It's disgusting.Not that I really have a say in the matter, but I can suffer knowing that there's silly Internet sleuthing/gossip if it means these kinds of cases get exhumed like they deserve. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
For me the stories less about what happened in this case and how easily corruptible/broken our legal system is and this is a means to an end to expose it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
JethroMcB posted:Also imaaaaaaaagine that one of those voiiiiiiiiiices is Christina Gutierrrrrrrrrrez, who places undue nasal emmmmmmmphasis every four of five wooooooooords. I can't believe this woman was a successful attorney, if that was her regular style. Were I a juror hearing her argue a case, those speech patterns alone would poise me to convict. MS can give you speech disorders.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
weekly font posted:MS can give you speech disorders. poo poo, man, don't undercut my disdain with such harsh truths.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
Gutierrez sounded like a complete piece of poo poo regardless of what made her talk like that. Demanding $10,000 cash for an expert she never even used and threatening to take away their house? gently caress her.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 07:53
|
|
|
Went through all 10 episodes over the course of the day. There is zero evidence tying Adnan to this murder beyond things Jay said. Jen was an idiot who believed whatever Jay said and reported it to the police as such. At least one of the people interviewed about Jay claimed that he was worried about Adnan and his girl (not clear if it was Stephanie or Jen at this point). All that said, Adnan may have done it but obviously that case was a farce and he should have never spent a day in prison. cams fucked around with this message at 08:03 on Dec 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 08:01
|
|
|
I think Adnan did it - he had the motive and despite Jay's flaws he had no reason to point the finger at Adnan if he didn't do it. Adnan's explanations for every little detail are too well thought out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 08:16
|
|
|
n8r posted:I think Adnan did it - he had the motive and despite Jay's flaws he had no reason to point the finger at Adnan if he didn't do it. Adnan's explanations for every little detail are too well thought out. He's had years and years in jail to think about them, so...
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 08:28
|
|
|
JethroMcB posted:Also imaaaaaaaagine that one of those voiiiiiiiiiices is Christina Gutierrrrrrrrrrez, who places undue nasal emmmmmmmphasis every four of five wooooooooords. I wonder if Sarah Koenig listened to those entire five days on tape and what it did for her life expectancy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 08:29
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 08:33
|
|
|
n8r posted:I think Adnan did it - he had the motive n8r posted:and despite Jay's flaws he had no reason to point the finger at Adnan if he didn't do it n8r posted:Adnan's explanations for every little detail are too well thought out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 08:36
|
|
|
Adnan called Jay pathetic because he ratted him out, Jay was probably involved more than he says but Adnan definitely was.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 08:41
|
|
|
African AIDS cum posted:Adnan called Jay pathetic because he ratted him out, Jay was probably involved more than he says but Adnan definitely was.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 08:42
|
|
|
Just listened to the latest episode: that was a much needed expansion on the character and role of the lawyer Gutierrez, who previously was just tending towards a "sleazy lawyer" cliche. Mind, like much in the whole case we're left with a fragmentary picture. In some ways, she reminded of someone with oncoming dementia, seemingly trying to hold on to it all but randomly forgetting or losing track of things, rambling on. (Note: the above was just a comparison, not a reddit-like "guys, i've worked it out!" I have no idea what was up with Gutierrez, but MS and fraud don't seem to explain it all.) But the "magic evidence"? Stunning. That should have changed the whole case right there. And SK's final "psychopath" quip? Can't help but think that's a dig at the internet detectives. nonathlon fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Dec 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 10:57
|
|
|
Yeah all that overwhelming evidence, like, "The other guy saying he did it," and...uh...the partial handprint on the map that was found in a car he had been in daily for like a year, and...hmm.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
JethroMcB posted:Yeah all that overwhelming evidence, like, "The other guy saying he did it," and...uh...the partial handprint on the map that was found in a car he had been in daily for like a year, and...hmm. If you assume Jay is making poo poo up (and he is, the degree to which is arguable) then there is absolutely NO reason to suspect Adnan had anything to do with this crime.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
I don't even particularly care if Adnan is guilty right now. The more shocking thing to me is to see how convinced all the jurors and that judge is of the verdict based on the evidence at hand. Are we missing some important piece of information that they have? That's the only explanation I can think of for the degree of certainty that they have. I hear sometimes that the public doesn't have access to all the evidence presented at a trial and so the public opinion goes a completely different way from the actual jury, but it seems that all the evidence and courtroom stuff is available to Koenig.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
They're all convinced because if they're not then these people and this judge just sent an innocent teenager to jail for a crime he didn't commit on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence and the testimony of a known liar, and the attendant guilt and stupidity of their actions would be too much to take Like look at how people act in the star citizen thread, and that's just from having spent a large amount of money on video game spaceships, imagine if it was over imprisoning someone for life
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
A large part of it is probably the ramping up of Islamophobia after 9/11 colouring things
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 19:12
|
|
|
I just read a column about how Serial is 'problematic' because Hae Min Lee's parent's were not on board with Sarah Koenig making the documentary and that she shouldn't be reading from her diary anyway. Welp,
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
I would say it's more the...I guess "guiltization" of America is an okay word to describe what I mean There's been an increase in the culture in America where the people arresting are always right and the dissidents, radicals, and arrested are always wrong Part of this is from the popularity of shows like law and order and csi and NCIS but I think it's also from how people reacted to occupy Wall Street or ferguson or the Zimmerman case, the outcomes of those moments so a shifting in American preconceptions on radicalism or dissidents where cops and uniforms are fetishized and the criminal/dissident element is imprisoned So what ends up happening is juries look at the defense stand and go instead of "the accused is innocent until the prosecution proves them guilty, period, one hundred percent" because cops and te government in general are worshipped and the unruly elements of society are demonized it's a situation where the average observer is thinking "well he musta did something wrong, that's why he's there in the first place"
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
Disappointing Pie posted:For me the stories less about what happened in this case and how easily corruptible/broken our legal system is and this is a means to an end to expose it. This is overblowing it, this is not always true, no system is 100% effective. Our legal system is one of the best in the world but it does involved people and people make mistakes. Don't drat an entire system because an innocence man might have been put in jail.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 20:03
|
|
|
Tormented posted:Don't drat an entire system because an innocence man might have been put in jail. Can I drat an entire system because two cops in the last week were exonerated after murdering individuals?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:I would say it's more the...I guess "guiltization" of America is an okay word to describe what I mean How would any of this pop culture ephemera be relevant to a case tried in 2000? Explain.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
I think this case is a strange example of a miscarriage of justice that happened to get the right guy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 02:20 |
|
|
Blue Star Error posted:I think this case is a strange example of a miscarriage of justice that happened to get the right guy. Same here my friend
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 20:52
|
|