That was a great podcast. Looks like both sides now have some doubts, or at the very least thinks the new evidence might shed a different light on his guilt.
I listened to that podcast, and the even though it seemed slanted against the state's case, I still think he did it. I mean, she was his ex, he told people he was going to kill her and his friend said he saw the body in his trunk and helped him hide the body... I'm not sure what more is needed ...
I will disagree with that one. Susan Simpson took apart the case apart from Serial - see Season One of Undisclosed. Here is a starter. A lot she found that was not in the podcast Simpson expounds on this in the docu-series, noting that “outgoing calls only are reliable for location status,” and that Waranowitz was not aware that the prosecution provided him cellphone billing records as opposed to concrete location data. She says she emailed Waranowitz in 2015 asking him if he was aware of this fact. After initially balking at the prospect of answering any questions — Simpson claims Kevin Urick, the state prosecutor in the original Syed murder trial, basically said something bad would happen to Waranowitz if he talked to her — Waranowitz eventually wound up signing an affidavit that said he didn’t stand behind his original testimony. “If I had known that it was AT&T Wireless' legal policy for incoming calls to not be considered reliable information in determining cellphone location, I would have inquired further within my organization and attempted to learn why this disclaimer was issued,” Waranowitz wrote. Who Is Susan Simpson, And How Did She Get Involved In Adnan Syed's Case? | Oxygen Official Site
The Motion (linked in the story in Tweet), now say they have other suspects 6. 2021-2022 INVESTIGATION ~ TWO SUSPECTS HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED The parties have developed evidence regarding the possible involvement of two alternative suspects. References to these two suspects will be mentioned throughout this motion as “one of the suspects.” The two suspects may be involved individually or may be involved together. These suspects were known persons at the time of the investigation of the case and not properly ruled out, as set forth below. In the State's reinvestigation of this matter, new information was learned about these individuals that suggest motive and/or propensity to commit this crime. However, in order to protect the integrity of the on-going investigation, the names of the suspects, which suspect in particular, and the specific details of the information obtained will not be provided at this time. A. Brady Violation: It was Reported to the State that One of the Suspects had Threatened to Kill the Victim and Provided Motives for that Threat The State located a document in the State's trial file, which provided details about one of the suspects. A person provided information to the State that one of the suspects had a motive to kill the victim, and that suspect had threatened to kill the victim in the presence of another individual. The suspect said that “he would make her [Ms. Lee] disappear. He would kill her.” The State also located a separate document in the State's trial file, in which a different person relayed information that can be viewed as a motive for that same suspect to harm the victim
His lawyer was highly incompetent, and there was apparently information withheld, but he almost certainly did it. I suppose there is the small chance she was a victim of some kind of random attack.
Information was withheld See excerpt above from Motion filed TODAY), his lawyer was incompetent, and he almost certainly did NOT do it. It's been years, but I would suggest anyone evaluating this issue be fully conversant in the first season of Undisclosed, which went through a lot of the evidence never covered in the podcast, a quantum more info Undisclosed Podcast
Isn't that podcast done by his sister or one of his family members? He would have to be the unluckiest person in the world if someone else did it.
3. He should have to stay in prison for his part in creating all the cliches of true crime podcasting
Rabia Chaudry was a family friend. Not technically related but that's a fair description, as the families were very close. But the only thing Rabia did was provide the case file to Susan Simpson, a Maryland attorney who had started following the case on Serial and direct messaged her. When Susan looked through the file she found all sorts of things, including an AT&T document saying that the cell phone records were unreliable, and much more. All of that is what gave rise to the later proceedings. Also Colin Miller, a professor of evidence at the University of South Carolina School of Law, who also followed the case. He added a lot of detailed evidentiary legal analysis to the documents. They were the ones who put together the podcast presentation. They had no previous connection and I don't believe Colin has ever met Adnan, although Susan may have later. But they basically took apart the case based upon the file and based upon things they figured out from following the podcast. It was a thing at the time. It wasn't really a close call once they had gone through the case file. It was plain that Adnan was assuredly not guilty, and they were pretty sure they know who likely was. I'm not going to use the name here, for the same legal reasons they hesitated to. but the state has two suspects they are investigating now
Well, there are certainly a ton on inconsistencies between the stories of all involved, but the one thing we know 100% for sure is that “jay” (his friend) was involved in the disposal of the body, and hiding the car, etc… jay spilled his guts with details only the police knew (some conspiracy theories say the police fed jay the story to frame Adnon, but I don’t buy that). But jay also had an alibi for the actual murder, fingered Adnon as the killer, and Jay’s version of the story fits the evidence and timelime pretty well. Adnon had no alibi and could not contradict jays version of events. I don’t think the jury got it wrong, based on the pod cast, it will be interesting to watch how this plays out, if even the prosecution is calling for a new trial.
Jay plainly was fed by the police, as shown in the actual tapes, paused with breaks in recording, and "taps". They listed to the actual recorded interviews on Undisclosed. The car had not been there for months as shown by the wear on the ground around (they got the case photos). Again, I would greatly recommend following that podcast. They went into reams of additional data, showed their work, etc. They even took apart the timeline beyond what was in the original Serial podcast.
Nah. You're parroting Thiru. Not at all. She was interviewed in Undisclosed and went on record, including being contacted by Urich
One example of the detail in Susan's analysis, on Jay's "story" But by the time of the second trial, however, the prosecution had changed its tune, and seems to have realized that the 4:27 and 4:58 calls were not showing that Jay was at Cathy’s apartment at all. They were (allegedly) showing that Jay was near his house instead. Just like Jay said in his first interview. Oops. That’s okay, though. Because when Jay’s story does not match the cellphone records, the solution, as always, is simply to change Jay’s story. Which is what the prosecution apparently did at the second trial, through the testimony of the prosecution’s expert witness, Abe Waranowitz. During direct examination, Waranowitz was questioned about whether the test calls he had made were consistent with Jay’s (new) story: KU: Now, if there was testimony that someone had dropped someone off at school to go to track practice and the person who had the car went to Glston Park, parked for a while and then went back to pick the person up, if you found — and they called at Glston Park, one or more incoming calls were received by the AT&T wireless subscriber telephone and then you found cell phone records that had calls from the L654C cell site, would that functioning of the AT&T network be consistent with the testimony? Waranowitz: Yes. (2/08/00 Tr. 102.) Jay’s story is truly a wondrous thing. It can be consistent with the cellphone records when they are wrong, and then still be consistent even after the cellphone records have been corrected. And how could a story that is so amazingly consistent with the cellphone records have possibly been anything other than true? -Susan Serial: Evidence that Jay’s Story was Coached to Fit the Cellphone Records
Like with The Staircase, I think the more time anyone has to mount a defense, the more stuff you can throw against the wall that establishes reasonable doubt (and the state doesnt have to do anything to debunk any of it or explain it away post-conviction). Michael Peterson almost certainly pushed his wife down the stairs and this guy almost certainly killed his ex, but there are plenty of weird things that potentially make these guys some of the unluckiest people in the world if they didnt do it.
Don't know anything about that case. I just know that in Adnan's case, it wasn't just that the State had a weak case with misconduct, it's that there was NO WAY he was guilty. Not even close. There is a world of facts and analysis out there, mainly from Susan's 2015 blog, but it looks like the State now has even more
I cant believe you are that in the weeds with Serial and know nothing about the Michael Peterson/The Staircase. Its like knowing everything about the Beatles but you dont know who the Rolling Stones are.
